Did Stannis even have a chance? (Spoilers)

[Lady Sansa's Direwolf]

I've often wondered why Stannis was so afraid of Renly that he resorted to black magic to get rid of him. Renly wasn't much of a proper soldier, and Stannis was the best military commander in Westeros. If they had met on the field, I doubt Renly would have been successful without aid from Loras Tyrell. Why use Mel and her shadow children when an easy victory could have been his?

Once Stannis had Renly killed, he lost the momentum of being the best fit for the throne. From that point on, it was all downhill for him.

[Lady Blackmont]

The fuck are you talking about?

6,000 men cannot best 70,000, I don't care how amazing Stannis is.

[Ludo Kressh]

I've often wondered why Stannis was so afraid of Renly that he resorted to black magic to get rid of him. Renly wasn't much of a proper soldier, and Stannis was the best military commander in Westeros. If they had met on the field, I doubt Renly would have been successful without aid from Loras Tyrell. Why use Mel and her shadow children when an easy victory could have been his?

Once Stannis had Renly killed, he lost the momentum of being the best fit for the throne. From that point on, it was all downhill for him.

And he did it not just to kill Renly, but to incorporate Renly's army into his own. Faced with the option of joining Stannis or the torch, I think most men would join Stannis, which they did.

[Lord Giggles]

Because Stannis couldn't have won in a pitched battle. I don't care how good your commander is or how disciplined your army is, unless you've got a pass, a fortress or another large force multiplier(like the English did at Agincourt) you aren't going to win if you're outnumbered 4:1

[Valhalla Morghulis]

The fuck are you talking about?

6,000 men cannot best 70,000, I don't care how amazing Stannis is.

If this is the kind of loyalty he inspires this man could never be King, it would be perpetual Civil War, utterly disastrous.

[Stag_legion]

If this is the kind of loyalty he inspires this man could never be King, it would be perpetual Civil War, utterly disastrous.

First, stannis was the lord of dragonstone and surrounding houses in the narrow sea before the war and few men can be mustered from such a small amount of land. It wasn't stannis' fault.

Second, Renly was the most popular man in the seven kingdoms, he was a celebrity and he had the stormlands and friendship of loras and the reach. Its really not surprising he could get such a big army.

Stannis does seem to have a PR issue, lots of higher ranking houses are weary of him because he doesn't give out favors and generally clamps down on their excesses (unlike renly and robert). But he does inspire loyalty from the ground up and if he does good in the north and beyond he could generate a substantial support base in the future.

[Lady Blackmont]

That's kinda the point.

Renly knew he'd have to kill Stannis. Otherwise you'd have every stable boy in the Seven Kingdoms whispering about the rightful elder brother.

Even if Renly didn't murder him, the Tyrell's would have, to secure the Throne. Anyone who thinks Stannis would just meekly accept Storm's End and forgo his right to the Throne is lying to themselves. Is there really a difference between consciously entering a battle with the intent to murder your brother, and having an assassin accomplish the same task? Stannis accomplished exactly what Renly wanted to, without exhausting his new army.

[calo760]

Why use Mel and her shadow children when an easy victory could have been his?

The purpose of using the shadow to assassinate Renly was to prevent the battle and minimize any unnecessary casualties. Stannis had the smallest army, and he saw an opportunity to win over Renly's bannermen to his cause. Only Renly needed to be dealt with, as it became clear to Stannis that his brother was a complete egomaniac. Renly's claim was fueled by arrogance and vanity and delusions of grandeur, and he would gladly betray his own brother and dismiss the law to bring him glory. Stannis sees things for what they are and he saw that an egomaniac with the largest army is a dangerous thing. Hundreds, if not thousands of soldiers would have been killed they went to battle. The shadows ultimately save lives.

Stannis made a sacrifice. He loved his brother and it devastated him to do it, but it was the practical option that prevented the most death. He knew killing his brother would dub him as a kinslayer, and killing him with blackmagic would besmirch his honor even more. Stannis is a man who thinks about the big picture and will ultimately do the right thing. He would never put his honor or reputation over the good of the realm. Killing 1 man to prevent a thousand deaths is better than rolling the dice to see who wins while gambling with the lives of many good men, Basic math really.

People have the misconception that Stannis didn't love his brother but the opposite is true. Stannis loved both of his brothers but they never loved him back. When he killed Renly, he realized how much he did love his brother, but it was too late, It's a pretty sad part of the story and you get a better understanding from the books.

[Valhalla Morghulis]

Stannis is a man who thinks about the big picture and will ultimately do the right thing. He would never put his honor or reputation over the good of the realm. Killing 1 man to prevent a thousand deaths is better than rolling the dice to see who wins while gambling with the lives of many good men, Basic math really.

While the maths does add up and this does make a sort of sense it does not make moral sense. This is always the argument dictators and those that are morally ambivalent or worse give to justify murder or mass murder. It is this reasoning Stannis uses on Davos over Gendry and Davos, one of the story's moral compasses, says killing one to save thousands or even millions is one too many.

It is idealistic rather than practical but these are the standards that good men must hold to lest one dark act lead to another and then another and then maybe even to the burning alive of a little girl. Would Jon Snow or Ned have murdered Renly or Shireen for the greater good? No, they would rather have killed themselves.

While Stannis is not a bad man, he is ultimately a weak and desperate one and when Brienne comes for him he does protest his innocence or even try to fight her, he knows justice has come for him.

[Stag_legion]

While the maths does add up and this does make a sort of sense it does not make moral sense. This is always the argument dictators and those that are morally ambivalent or worse give to justify murder or mass murder. It is this reasoning Stannis uses on Davos over Gendry and Davos, one of the story's moral compasses, says killing one to save thousands or even millions is one too many.

It is idealistic rather than practical but these are the standards that good men must hold to lest one dark act lead to another and then another and then maybe even to the burning alive of a little girl. Would Jon Snow or Ned have murdered Renly or Shireen for the greater good? No, they would rather have killed themselves.

While Stannis is not a bad man, he is ultimately a weak and desperate one and when Brienne comes for him he does protest his innocence or even try to fight her, he knows justice has come for him.

You are taking the show to be canon?! the show hasn't been consistent with the books in regards to stannis from the second season and can't really be used to infer anything about stannis in the books. Stannis on the show is much much weaker willed and fanatical than book stannis. the only similarity between book and show stannis is that the actor's mannerism is similar to book stannis, but the actions and motivations of his character are pretty different.

Stannis' story deals with a lot of morally ambiguous situations, much of ASOIAF is that and if that doesn't sit well with you, you might want to read something else.

Also in spite of Renly's greed and carelessness for declaring himself king, I still liked his character. He was a funny guy and brought light heartedness to the books, its just a shame he brought this upon himself. if he had sided with stannis he would have made the books more enjoyable, especially if him and stannis kept arguing :lol:

[jbob]

He didn't even have a chance in the books until Jon told him what to do. Jon in the show didn't tell him how to win the North. He probably still doesn't have a chance since even if he does win Winterfell, it's going to take a miracle for him to get out of the North with enough men to take KIng's Landing. And with it snowing there as well...

Also, TV Show Stannis perfectly epitomises, "that the human heart in conflict with itself is the only thing worth writing about", that GRRM loves to quote.

What was otherwise laughable and B-grade was made look awesome by Stephan Dillane's acting and that one last scene where he kills two men.

The book Stannis did everything a good military leader would have done.

1. Used the wildlings as his army

2. Managed to get support of at least some Northmen to understand the land better

3. Captured another holdfast near Winterfell (Stannis Captures deepwood motte)

4. Secured the future of his house by putting Sheerin in charge and Golden company to protect her.

5. Used Davos to get support of prominent house of White Harbor.

D&D have made a mockery of Stannis.

He didn't do most of those things without Jon telling him how. Some great military leader.

[Lady Blackmont]

His reputation is not based on a few months in a land he doesn't know.

Even so, he is a wise commander, as he has the intellect to ask advice from more knowledgeable people.

[acosta]

I doubt it. An actual siege of Winterfell in the middle of what might end up being a decade-long winter is very very close to an impossible task. I always figured he'd win in the books, but because Manderly was going to lead a revolt from inside the castle and hand it to him, not by military force from the outside. Even in the show, say he defeats the entire cavalry charge against him. Then what? The whole point of a siege is you starve the people out of the castle. They apparently haven't invented artillery yet in Westeros, so without dragons, the only way to take a castle is with overwhelming force sacrificing thousands in the process (his plan for Blackwater) or with dragons, which he doesn't have. The Boltons are provisioned for the entire winter, and even better provisioned if you kill all their horsemen and horses. All they have to do is make sure no one is able to climb the walls.

[TickTak7]

I've often wondered why Stannis was so afraid of Renly that he resorted to black magic to get rid of him. Renly wasn't much of a proper soldier, and Stannis was the best military commander in Westeros. If they had met on the field, I doubt Renly would have been successful without aid from Loras Tyrell. Why use Mel and her shadow children when an easy victory could have been his?

Once Stannis had Renly killed, he lost the momentum of being the best fit for the throne. From that point on, it was all downhill for him.

I always thought Stannis had similar reasons for going smoke-baby-magic with Renly, as Tywin did with the Red Wedding.

It's quick, effective, and ensures that you don't lose many of your own men.

Plus, with Highgarden aligning with Renly, didn't that mean that Stannis would have to put up with the Redwynes? Ie. Renly would have had a much bigger numerical advantage?

[Facebookless Man]

Would Jon Snow or Ned have murdered Renly or Shireen for the greater good? No, they would rather have killed themselves.

Ned would have sided with Stannis on this issue without hesitation, because that's what the law commanded. Honour does not require that you give traitors a fair fight.

Jon wouldn't even have needed the backing of the law. He killed Qhorin Halfhand based exactly on the kind of argument you're saying leads to ever greater evil: to save many more lives.

Neither of them would burn Shireen as far as I can see, but then again neither would Stannis. If he ends up doing it, we'll see under what circumstances and we can ask ourselves what others would do.

[calo760]

Would Jon Snow or Ned have murdered Renly or Shireen for the greater good? No, they would rather have killed themselves.

No. And this is what makes Stannis the hero. Stannis would risk his life to save people who despise him, and sacrifice the one and only thing he loves, all in order to save the realm from the wight walkers and their army of the dead , a threat that 99% of Westeros doesn't even acknowledge or even believe is real. But a hero will do what needs to be done, no matter how difficult or painful.

Ned and Jon would put their vanity before all else. They are more concerned of what people think of them and what may one day be written about them, and would have zombies devour all the men, women and children in Westeros before they ever let themselves be labeled "kinslayer".

Stannis would desecrate his honor and soil his reputation, and live with the burden of losing all that he loved, if that's what it costs to save the realm. It is his duty as Protector of the Realm after all.

**In the ancient prophecy of The Last Hero, the hero, Azor Ahai, forged his legendary sword by sacrificing his greatest love. His wife, Nissa Nissa.. Shireen was Stannis' greatest love and he put his faith in The Lord of Light and did what had to be done to fulfill the prophecy. If The Lord of Light IS real, and the prophecy is real, then Stannis sacrificing his daughter isn't bad at all, but rather a sad thing that had to happen to achieve something great (which in this case, is life continuing to live)

"Sometimes severity is the price we pay for greatness."

[MoreOrLess]

The reality is though that a great number of histories most ruthless rulers who killed millions most likely convinced themselves that they were acting for the greater good(Stalin, Mao, Hitler etc). When you head down that path theres the risk of your own ambition impinging on your judgement as well as hardening yourself to increasingly ruthless actions or indeed simply acting on incorrect information.

When in comes to the Starks honour I would say as well that its not just about personal ego but a realisation that honour is what holds a lot of society and indeed your own power base in place. Ruling effectively does afterall depend as much on winning hearts and minds as anything and the show seems to demonstrate this with Stannis alienating half of his force by killing his daughter.

In tactical terms I don't know if its been mentioned or not but what about the idea that a lot of the Boltons mounted army were actually Stannis's sellswords? the hints earlier in the season seemed to point towards them lacking large numbers of cavalery and it makes sense that the deserters would go to the Boltons who have the shelter and supplies that Stannis lacks plus of course no qualms about such double dealing.

If that were the case and Stannis thought he was dealing with more of a 1 to 1 situation it makes his choice much less suicidal. The Boltons afterall cannot really afford to fight a pitched battle on those terms since even a victory would likely prove pyrrhic as it would weaken them to the degree some other northern lord could march in and take there position. In siege the Boltons have the advantage in supplies but there is Wintertown outside the walls and of course there off there home patch with much of the local population being hostile to there rule, if a siege were to drag on that could build up and be emboldened.

As far as Stannis's ability though I would say the show has never really looked to paint him as a "genius" so much as they've looked to make his tactics a reflection of his personality, by the book, ruthless and unflinching.

[Winter's Cold]

The purpose of using the shadow to assassinate Renly was to prevent the battle and minimize any unnecessary casualties. Stannis had the smallest army, and he saw an opportunity to win over Renly's bannermen to his cause. Only Renly needed to be dealt with, as it became clear to Stannis that his brother was a complete egomaniac. Renly's claim was fueled by arrogance and vanity and delusions of grandeur, and he would gladly betray his own brother and dismiss the law to bring him glory. Stannis sees things for what they are and he saw that an egomaniac with the largest army is a dangerous thing. Hundreds, if not thousands of soldiers would have been killed they went to battle. The shadows ultimately save lives.

Stannis made a sacrifice. He loved his brother and it devastated him to do it, but it was the practical option that prevented the most death. He knew killing his brother would dub him as a kinslayer, and killing him with blackmagic would besmirch his honor even more. Stannis is a man who thinks about the big picture and will ultimately do the right thing. He would never put his honor or reputation over the good of the realm. Killing 1 man to prevent a thousand deaths is better than rolling the dice to see who wins while gambling with the lives of many good men, Basic math really.

People have the misconception that Stannis didn't love his brother but the opposite is true. Stannis loved both of his brothers but they never loved him back. When he killed Renly, he realized how much he did love his brother, but it was too late, It's a pretty sad part of the story and you get a better understanding from the books.

Stannis is the bigger egomaniac of the two. He knows that he has no definitive proof of Joffrey's bastardy. Yet he expects the lord of the realm to support his claim anyway. Renly's did not initially desire to be king. However, if that was the price for removing Lannister influence and gaining the support of the reach, he was willing to pay it. Stannis believes he can beat the Lannister-Tyrell alliance with the power of the lords of the stormlands and the narrow sea. He fails at blackwater, most of his men go over to "Renly" and he loses control of the ancestral Baratheon homelands. Stannis could have renounced his claim as Aemon did but instead he chose to doom his house.

[calo760]

I just think it is hypocritical of Renly in trying to remove the Lannisters from power because Joffery isn't Roberts trueborn son and therefor not the rightful heir, when he is just as guilty of being a usurper, if not even more guilty, seeing as how Joffery atleast has gone hia entire3 life being Roberts son, so. He genuinely believed he was the legitimate king. Renly knew he was in the wrong and would rather steal the throne from his brother than be the bigger man and accept that Stannis is king. If he declared for Stannis as he should have, he could have given Stannis counsel and could have been much more successful in defeating the Lannisters. Stannis offered that to his youger brother and Renly mocked him. Someone that immature has no business being king anyways.

.

Aemon turned down the throne and conceded to his younger brother,and turned his life to the citadel and became a maester. Becoming a maester was never on Stannis' agenda, and Aemon probably genuinely thought his younger brother would do well as king and do good for the realm, where as Stannis knew Renly and that his desire to be king was a popularity contest and a lust for power and glory. Unless you are trying to be a holyman,, no okder brother would ever bend his knee to his younger brother, especially if he usurped his position. People would have less respect for Stannis if he conceded to Renly than they had with him when he conjured a shadow to assassinate his brother.

.

But the whole Stannis vs Renly dispute is a lot like Republican vs Democrat or Christianity vs Atheism. Each side strongly believes they are right and have good reasons to support their beliefs, but will never convince the other side that they are wrong. Its just the way of the world. I appreciate hearing both sides of the argument though :)

[GrammarYatzy]

While the maths does add up and this does make a sort of sense it does not make moral sense. This is always the argument dictators and those that are morally ambivalent or worse give to justify murder or mass murder. It is this reasoning Stannis uses on Davos over Gendry and Davos, one of the story's moral compasses, says killing one to save thousands or even millions is one too many.

It is idealistic rather than practical but these are the standards that good men must hold to lest one dark act lead to another and then another and then maybe even to the burning alive of a little girl. Would Jon Snow or Ned have murdered Renly or Shireen for the greater good? No, they would rather have killed themselves.

While Stannis is not a bad man, he is ultimately a weak and desperate one and when Brienne comes for him he does protest his innocence or even try to fight her, he knows justice has come for him.

I understand and appreciate that you are trying to see things in the imbecilic black and white that D&D write the show with but try to understand, think a little, and use some perspective. Renly was 100% expecting his men to have killed stannis that morning. It's hard to believe there was any point in which renly didn't accept stannis dying as part of renlys becoming king plans. Stannis got to him first. It was an ugly moment but war is hell. We don't spend all of our time harassing soldiers that go off to wars and kill or be killed. There is nothing worse here

Sometimes people who just half-attentively watch the show, while maybe mashing buttons on their smart phone and talking to their boyfriend completely fail to understand the basics of how killing renly was self defense and not some sort of complicated moral balance

Stannis is the bigger egomaniac of the two. He knows that he has no definitive proof of Joffrey's bastardy. Yet he expects the lord of the realm to support his claim anyway. Renly's did not initially desire to be king. However, if that was the price for removing Lannister influence and gaining the support of the reach, he was willing to pay it. Stannis believes he can beat the Lannister-Tyrell alliance with the power of the lords of the stormlands and the narrow sea. He fails at blackwater, most of his men go over to "Renly" and he loses control of the ancestral Baratheon homelands. Stannis could have renounced his claim as Aemon did but instead he chose to doom his house.

Let's be realistic on Renly's motives. He is an example of one of GRRMS many really really poorly written cliches. At the heart of this kind of gay stereotype is narcisim. You see it with him choosing the lover that of the millions of people in the kingdom is the most like himself. Renly really loved himself that's why he could love Loras. He would love himself as king even more and that's pretty much it for his motiviation.