Which Great Houses' Bannermen would you want ?

[Diregon]

Which great houses' bannermen would you want on your side?

I would say for me the Tyrell bannermen.

first for the sheers numbers . They have the biggest army I am guessing

Secondly look the goddamn lineup !

Hightowers of Oldtown - The Citadel!

Tarly of Hornhill - Randyll Tarly, the best military commander

Redwynes of Arbor - The fleet and ofcourse the wine with it :p

These three houses themselves could be a Great House

Plus they are all superrich

But I guess the Northern bannermen are a close second too..

I wonder why Martin decided to put all awesome houses in the Reach .

[Jon's Queen Consort]

The Northern. Only Bolton have turn against the Stark when all the others fight for their restoration.

[The Marquis de Leech]

The Tyrells strike me as being First Among Equals, rather than completely dominant over the Reach (owing their status to the Targaryens is probably an influence on this too - less historical awe than the Starks, Lannisters, and Arryns). Which is probably to ensure that you don't end up with the Reach being ridiculously overpowered, and dominating the rest of Westeros - the Tyrells need to keep looking over their shoulders at the Hightowers.

[Diregon]

The Northern. Only Bolton have turn against the Stark when all the others fight for their restoration.

Karstarks :)

[The Wolves]

The North bannermen seem really loyal excluding the Boltons.

[Beacon]

The Tyrells strike me as being First Among Equals, rather than completely dominant over the Reach (owing their status to the Targaryens is probably an influence on this too - less historical awe than the Starks, Lannisters, and Arryns). Which is probably to ensure that you don't end up with the Reach being ridiculously overpowered, and dominating the rest of Westeros - the Tyrells need to keep looking over their shoulders at the Hightowers.

The Hightowers seem like an okay bunch but its the Florents that they really need to look out for...

[Jon's Queen Consort]

Karstarks :)

Not really. It was after Robb betrayed them that they left him not before and still they haven't gone to Boltons' side.

Also welcome!

[The Wolves]

The Hightowers seem like an okay bunch but its the Florents that they really need to look out for...

Still though the Hightowers are still their most powerful bannermen, a older house than them and are beyond powerful controlling one of the country's few cities, that's a house you don't turn your back on even if they have proven to be loyal.

The Florents can be easily controlled.

[The Holy Goat]

Not really. It was after Robb betrayed them that they left him not before and still they haven't gone to Boltons' side.

Also welcome!

The Karstarks betrayed Robb, not the other way around. A Lord can't just murder his king's hostages and his king's guardsmen along with them because he feels like it. The only truly loyal Karstark we have seen so far is Alys. Lord Rickard was loyal until he felt he didn't want to be anymore, his sons are unknown, and Arnolf and his sons are treacherous. SO the Karstarks as a whole are certainly not very reliable.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

The Karstarks betrayed Robb, not the other way around. A Lord can't just murder his king's hostages and his king's guardsmen along with them because he feels like it. The only truly loyal Karstark we have seen so far is Alys. Lord Rickard was loyal until he felt he didn't want to be anymore, his sons are unknown, and Arnolf and his sons are treacherous. SO the Karstarks as a whole are certainly not very reliable.

Arnolf and his sons want to steal the Karhold from Alys and that is why they are with Boltons. Robb betrayed the Karstarks when hypocritically prefered to kill Rickard and leave Cat alive. Since both of them had committed high treason they should had the same punishment. Robb for one more time proved how hypocritical he was by only punishing Rickard. If Robb dragged them in a war in order to take revenge and justice for his father there is no reason why Rickard shouldn't had the same for his sons.

[Pain killer Jane]

It is a toss up for me. Stark or Lannister Bannerman. Really it is a toss up between whether I want them to love me or fear me.

But I would have to weed out problematic bannerman.
Starks:

Boltons
Karstarks
Dustin (but that is a problem with Lady Dustin) get a new person in there and things might change.

Lannister:

Westerling (If I was Tywin I would have eliminated House Westerling even with their betrayal of Robb)

Spicer

[BadWo1f]

Stark bannermen. They are still fighting for Starks, even when their fort is burned, destroyed and captured by Boltons and when they are mostly known to be dead, they are also very capable fighters and able to fight long in bad conditions. I don't agree that Karstarks betrayed Starks in common meaning of the word. They killed those hostages but they would still fight on with Starks, I also think they were "pushed" into doing it by Robb's decisions (not saying they should do it or had any right to do it). Also, Cat should be next to Rickard then.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

Dustin (but that is a problem with Lady Dustin) get a new person in there and things might change.

This isn't quite correct. Lady Dustin had done nothing to betray the Starks, yes she hated Ned and she had every right to do so but she hadn't actually helped the Boltons. I don't think that she forgets what happened to her sister and her beloved nephew.

[Lointain]

Anyone except the northerners: too manny treacherous and false people around.

I probably stick with the Lannister's bannermen: atleast they don't have Boltons, Dustins, Ryswells, Stouts and Karstarks around them; and the lords of the West seem loyal and steadfast siding with the Lannisters

Or the Greyjoys's bannermen: thanks to the Drowned God, they aren't "honourable in the northern way" has the most important Stark's bannermen (that is: betray and kill your suzeran has soon is possible).

[The Holy Goat]

Arnolf and his sons want to steal the Karhold from Alys and that is why they are with Boltons. Robb betrayed the Karstarks when hypocritically prefered to kill Rickard and leave Cat alive. Since both of them had committed high treason they should had the same punishment. Robb for one more time proved how hypocritical he was by only punishing Rickard. If Robb dragged them in a war in order to take revenge and justice for his father there is no reason why Rickard shouldn't had the same for his sons.

Does Arnolf's motivations really matter in this instance? His sons and him are intending for the true lord of Karhold to be excecuted, after which they mean to force Alys into a marriage before having her killed. And they are willing to aid anyone to see this happen, even the Bolton's whom are the STark's eternal rivals and by many spuspected to be the cause of their demise. I'd clearly classify them as being rather treacherous and untrusthworthy.

Robb's act of not punishing Catelyn might be a case of hypocrisy and bad decision making, but it was not betrayal. He had made no promises to Lord Rickard, no vows that Jaime Lannister would never be released or handed over to Lord Rickard. As such he was fully in his right to excecute Lord Rickard for his actions, just as he would've been in his right to behead his own dear mother had he wished to do so. Lord Rickard however was, despite his disappointment, not in the right to murder King Robb's hostages, slay Ser Edmure's guardsmen, and then disband his force of 300 cavalry.

[LordImp]

Umber.

[Floki of the Ironborn]

Hard to say. The Lannister bannermen seem whipped into shape but if the Lannisters keep flailing then they'll start getting restless again. The Starks have many loyal forces excluding the Boltons, but they are not as well armed nor as numerous as other Houses. Baratheons are supposed to be among the fiercest of fighters but again, low numbers, plus they seem to turn cloak too easily.

I think I'll go with the Vale. Decent numbers, lots of knights, good land in a secure place, and honour keeping many in line even when their lord is a sickly boy.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

Does Arnolf's motivations really matter in this instance?

Of course it does. It shows that there are not the Karstarks who betray the Starks but Arnolf and his son.

Robb's act of not punishing Catelyn might be a case of hypocrisy and bad decision making, but it was not betrayal. He had made no promises to Lord Rickard, no vows that Jaime Lannister would never be released or handed over to Lord Rickard. As such he was fully in his right to excecute Lord Rickard for his actions, just as he would've been in his right to behead his own dear mother had he wished to do so. Lord Rickard however was, despite his disappointment, not in the right to murder King Robb's hostages, slay Ser Edmure's guardsmen, and then disband his force of 300 cavalry.

It is hypocrisy and double standards. The difference is that Rickard didn't let Robb's more valuable prisoner to walk away. If Ned deserved justice, Rickard's sons deserved the same. Why is one better than the other?

[Dragon Seed]

Does Arnolf's motivations really matter in this instance? His sons and him are intending for the true lord of Karhold to be excecuted, after which they mean to force Alys into a marriage before having her killed. And they are willing to aid anyone to see this happen, even the Bolton's whom are the STark's eternal rivals and by many spuspected to be the cause of their demise. I'd clearly classify them as being rather treacherous and untrusthworthy.

Robb's act of not punishing Catelyn might be a case of hypocrisy and bad decision making, but it was not betrayal. He had made no promises to Lord Rickard, no vows that Jaime Lannister would never be released or handed over to Lord Rickard. As such he was fully in his right to excecute Lord Rickard for his actions, just as he would've been in his right to behead his own dear mother had he wished to do so. Lord Rickard however was, despite his disappointment, not in the right to murder King Robb's hostages, slay Ser Edmure's guardsmen, and then disband his force of 300 cavalry.

Bullshit. That cluster fuck of a king, Robb Stark used a double standard when it came to his mommy. Karstark deserved to be executed for killing the hostages but Cat setting Jaimie free was a worse offense than killing a couple of Lannister cousins. Those Lannister kids had almost no value. None of Robbs bannermen gave two shits about them. Jaimie on the other hand was the most valuable hostage the North could ever wish to have. Cat letting him go was a huge blow to the North and destroyed the amazing degree of loyalty Ned and his family built over the years with the other Northern houses.

People have to stop giving Cat Stark a free pass for every blunder she causes. Robb should have done a double execution or none at all.

[The Holy Goat]

Of course it does. It shows that there are not the Karstarks who betray the Starks but Arnolf and his son.

It is hypocrisy and double standards. The difference is that Rickard didn't let Robb's more valuable prisoner to walk away. If Ned deserved justice, Rickard's sons deserved the same. Why is one better than the other?

And yet Arnolf and his line has proven themselves trecherous, ambitious, ruthless and not above kinslaying and murder. Wether the ones they intended to betray are the Starks, Stannis, Boltons or fellow Karstarks are rather irrelevant. Those previously mentioned traits are still there and I would thus consider them an untrusthworthy element in the North.

The fact that Robb's actions were hypocritical and a blatant example of double standard does not change the fact that what he did was lawful and what Lord Rickard did was not. Rickard was never betrayed. Robb had not promised him anything in return for his services, as far as we know - but the Karstarks had promised Robb loyalty and leal service, which Rickard failed to provide. This makes Rickard Karstark the betrayer and Robb Stark the betrayed in this case, no matter how justifiable Rickard's betrayal was (I would say it isn't, since he took revenge by proxy on two young squire only tangentially involved in Lord karstark's sons' deaths).

Bullshit. That cluster fuck of a king, Robb Stark used a double standard when it came to his mommy. Karstark deserved to be executed for killing the hostages but Cat setting Jaimie free was a worse offense than killing a couple of Lannister cousins. Those Lannister kids had almost no value. None of Robbs bannermen gave two shits about them. Jaimie on the other hand was the most valuable hostage the North could ever wish to have. Cat letting him go was a huge blow to the North and destroyed the amazing degree of loyalty Ned and his family built over the years with the other Northern houses.

People have to stop giving Cat Stark a free pass for every blunder she causes. Robb should have done a double execution or none at all.

I never claimed that Robb was not hypocritical nor employed double standard when dealing with his mother in comparison to how he dealed with Lord Rickard. And I am fully aware of Jaime's importance as a hostage when compared to Tion Frey and Willem Lannister. I'm also aware of the incredible blow Jaime's release was to the Stark cause and how irrational the griefstrucken Catelyn was when releasing him, or how hypocritical she was in it's aftermath. Doesn't change the fact that Rickard was the betrayer and Robb Stark the betrayed in this matter.