Tywin, Stannis, Roose, and Randyl

[Minsc]

 Renly comitted treason as he crowned himself despite of his older brother's stronger claim. Stannis was even willing to make Renly his heir to avoid bloodshed, but Renly refused.

One cannot commit treason against another traitor, thus Stannis has no right to issue any punishment against Renly when he is committing the same crime (Stannis is traitor to both Robert and Joffrey).  Renly was willing to actually give Stannis something he didn't have (unlike Stannis) and Stannis reused so he had every right to try to kill him after Stannis started the conflict.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

1. This is true, but he still chose his brother over the king and was willing to starve for him. Not comparable to Renly.

Renly was also starving for him. And lets be honest, even if Stannis chose to side with Aerys there would be other Robert loyalists in Storm's End.

And Renly has never abandoned Robert for nine months to sulk and leave Robert surrounded by people he thought of as dangerous to him.

2. Even if he planned it the way it happened, his brother was planing to kill him first, he never went through with the sacrifice and considered it because of the Others, not the crown.

He knew next  to nothing about the Others at the time.

 

He burns people for the same reason, and only people who deserve death anyway. Randyll threatened to kill his son

Key word here is threatened.

and put several of his own men to the sword,

He put Reach men, not his own men.

while lacking Stannis' redeeming qualities.

Tarly's attitude to rape is pretty well known, Brienne uses his name to scare his soldiers from committing it.

Tarly was actually the first Lord who was actually helping the people of the Riverlands. We have seen him do more for them than any Riverlord, Westerland lord or Northern lord during the war.

[Minsc]

Renly was also starving for him. And lets be honest, even if Stannis chose to side with Aerys there would be other Robert loyalists in Storm's End.

    ...........................

Tarly was actually the first Lord who was actually helping the people of the Riverlands. We have seen him do more for them than any Riverlord, Westerland lord or Northern lord during the war.

Not to mention how Aerys II would be just as likely to burn him even if he attempted to side with him.  Nor would Robert's men just allow Stannis to betray Robert.

I think you are selling Edmure short.

[7-KG]

What?  Stannis isn't a small child, his asshole comments are fully meant to have malicious intentions the same as when any adult insults someone.

His comments might offend a person, but he really doesn't does it just for prank as Renly did. Period.

[Minsc]

His comments might offend a person, but he really doesn't does it just for prank as Renly did. Period.

No, he does it just to be an asshole.  So it is actually much worse.

He burns people for the same reason, and only people who deserve death anyway.

None of the people has allowed burned deserved death and especially not that method.

[7-KG]

 

No, he does it just to be an asshole.  So it is actually much worse.

Where are you getting this idea from?

[Minsc]

Where are you getting this idea from?

Repeatedly saying malicious things about people for no reason is doing it to be an asshole.

[7-KG]

On 10/01/2016 at 4:05 PM, Minsc said:

Repeatedly saying malicious things about people for no reason is doing it to be an asshole.

Stannis might be bitter, but he has showed no sign that he wants to be an asshole by saying those things. You're making stuff up.

[John Doe]

Renly was also starving for him. And lets be honest, even if Stannis chose to side with Aerys there would be other Robert loyalists in Storm's End.

And Renly has never abandoned Robert for nine months to sulk and leave Robert surrounded by people he thought of as dangerous to him.

He knew next  to nothing about the Others at the time.

Key word here is threatened.

He put Reach men, not his own men.

Tarly's attitude to rape is pretty well known, Brienne uses his name to scare his soldiers from committing it.

Tarly was actually the first Lord who was actually helping the people of the Riverlands. We have seen him do more for them than any Riverlord, Westerland lord or Northern lord during the war.

1.  Renly was a child who had no say in the matter.

2. He was actually safer without Stannis around. 

3. 

"I never asked for this crown. Gold is cold and heavy on the head, but so long as I am the king, I have a duty . . . If I must sacrifice one child to the flames to save a million from the dark . . . sacrifice . . . is never easy, Davos. Or it is no true sacrifice. Tell him, my lady."

4. Exactly, his own son.

5. Doesn't make it much better they were in the same army. 

6. Of course, but that's why he was commanded to go there in the first place. 

None of the people has allowed burned deserved death

By the laws of westeros, all of them do.

One cannot commit treason against another traitor, thus Stannis has no right to issue any punishment against Renly when he is committing the same crime (Stannis is traitor to both Robert and Joffrey).  Renly was willing to actually give Stannis something he didn't have (unlike Stannis) and Stannis reused so he had every right to try to kill him after Stannis started the conflict.

Stannis is no traitor to both Robert and Joffrey. But call it what you want, Renly was behind Stannis in the line of succession. Renly wasn't Stannis' heir besides.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

 

1.  Renly was a child who had no say in the matter.

And? Was he not also suffering from the same conditions as Stannis was?

2. He was actually safer without Stannis around.

According to who?

 

3.

This proves what exactly? He has no idea who or what the Others are when he was prepared to sacrifice his nephew.

4. Exactly, his own son.

He made a threat, we have no idea if he would have carried it out. Stannic actually kinslayed his own brother.

5. Doesn't make it much better. 

But it does make it better.

6. Of course, but that's why he was commanded to go there in the first place. 

And? You were asking for a redeeming quality, his work in the Maidenpool lands is certainly a redeeming quality especially when you compare that to what the other lords did in the Riverlands.

 

Stannis is no traitor to both Robert and Joffrey. But call it what you want, Renly was behind Stannis in the line of succession.

Stannis was a traitor to Robert. He was convinced that the Lannisters killed his Hand and kept his mouth shut,  he had reason to believe that they were a danger to both Robert and his next Hand and did nothing.

Some would definitely call his lack of action traitorous.

[Minsc]

 

 

Stannis is no traitor to both Robert and Joffrey. But call it what you want, Renly was behind Stannis in the line of succession. Renly wasn't Stannis' heir besides.

Stannis is a traitor to both.  Stannis discovered a dangerous secret and conspiracy against Robert, but rather warn his brother he flees and waits until his brother is killed before revealing his knowledge.  Making Stannis complicit in the conspiracy and treason against Robert.  He is a traitor to Joffrey by rising up against him, despite Joffrey being Robert's acknowledged and legal heir with no legal council declaring Joffrey unfit to inherit.

By the laws of westeros, all of them do.

Stannis has committed or contemplated performing the same crimes.

[John Doe]

And? Was he not also suffering from the same conditions as Stannis was?

According to who?

This proves what exactly? He has no idea who or what the Others are when he was prepared to sacrifice his nephew.

He made a threat, we have no idea if he would have carried it out. Stannic actually kinslayed his own brother.

But it does make it better.

And? You were asking for a redeeming quality, his work in the Maidenpool lands is certainly a redeeming quality especially when you compare that to what the other lords did in the Riverlands.

Stannis was a traitor to Robert. He was convinced that the Lannisters killed his Hand and kept his mouth shut,  he had reason to believe that they were a danger to both Robert and his next Hand and did nothing.

Some would definitely call his lack of action traitorous.

1. He had no choice, Stannis had. The difference is blatantly obvious.

2. Cersei.

Eddard Stark took up right where Arryn had left off; his meddling had forced her to rid herself of Robert sooner than she would have liked, before she could deal with his pestilential brothers. 

3. It shows it's not just about the crown as you suggested, but about the danger Melisandre warns him about, which is later revealed to be the Others.

4. Yes. The difference is Renly and Stannis were at war while Samwell did nothing wrong.

5. Point being, when

Stannis was faced with a similiar situation (the Karstark betrayal) he said

 Ser Richard, whilst I am breaking fast with Lord Arnolf, you are to disarm his men and take them into custody. Most will be asleep. Do them no harm, unless they resist. It may be they did not know. Question some upon that point... but sweetly. If they had no knowledge of this treachery, they shall have the chance to prove their loyalty.

instead of slaughtering them as Randyll did with Florent men.  It's clear who belongs least in this list.

6. At best to a small extent.

7. Who are those some, apart from forum users? Ned is one of the pickiest men in the seven kingdoms regarding such things as duty, honor etc. and has this to say about Stannis:

"Lord Stannis shared the secret Jon Arryn had died for, he was certain of it."

and

"The throne is his by rights. I would welcome his ascent."

No thoughts about treason, no thoughts about his claim being nullified.

@minsc: See the quotes above. Regarding "Joffrey being Robert's acknowledged and legal heir", if you are talking about Robert's will, that was ignored by Joff and featured him as his son, so that part is invalid either way For the "wait until his brother dies" part: It's quite possible he gathered his strength (as Varys suggests) and waited for an opportunity to strike.

" No one knows what Stannis has been doing on Dragonstone, but I will wager you that he's gathered more swords than seashells."

The forum keeps fucking up some of my quotes, so I had to put them in literal quotations.

[dariopatke]

Alonng with Balon best fathers in Westeros.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

 

1. He had no choice, Stannis had. The difference is blatantly obvious.

We really don't know if he had a choice. Somehow I can't see the Baratheon loyalists opening their gates to let walk out.

Nor do I think Stannis was stupid enough to think that he would not be used a hostage should he have went over to Aerys.

2. Cersei.

How was he safer? You said he was safer without Stannis around, he wasnt. He was assassinated. He could not have been any less safer with Stannis around and it is possible, had he opened his mouth, that Robert's assassination could have been prevented. 

3. It shows it's not just about the crown as you suggested, but about the danger Melisandre warns him about, which is later revealed to be the Others.

Of course it is just about the Crown. He got his panties in a twist when Ned was made Hand and that had nothing to do with vague warnings from Melisandre.

And Stannis is pretty much an atheist, if she was not promising him that he would be King he would have no reason to have her around.

"I stopped believing in gods the day I saw the Windproud break up across the bay. Any gods so monstrous as to drown my mother and father would never have my worship, I vowed. In King’s Landing, the High Septon would prattle at me of how all justice and goodness flowed from the Seven, but all I ever saw of either was made by men.

4. Yes. The difference is Renly and Stannis were at war while Samwell did nothing wrong.

What did Edric do?

5. Point being, when

Hidden Content

Slaughter? Not that we know of. It was a battle between Florents who wanted to join Stannis and those that didnt.

And is Tarly not doing his duty, following the Tyrells orders?

6. At best to a small extent.

Sure, I'm nor really bothered about quibbling over how better it was, just that it was.

7. Who are those some, apart from forum users? Ned is one of the pickiest men in the seven kingdoms regarding such things as duty, honor etc. and has this to say about Stannis:

Ned said that without knowing that Stannis had known (at least strongly suspected) the truth about Cersei's children.

Had Stannis done his duty Robert and Ned would likely still be alive.

[John Doe]

We really don't know if he had a choice. Somehow I can't see the Baratheon loyalists opening their gates to let walk out.

Nor do I think Stannis was stupid enough to think that he would not be used a hostage should he have went over to Aerys.

How was he safer? You said he was safer without Stannis around, he wasnt. He was assassinated. He could not have been any less safer with Stannis around and it is possible, had he opened his mouth, that Robert's assassination could have been prevented. 

Of course it is just about the Crown. He got his panties in a twist when Ned was made Hand and that had nothing to do with vague warnings from Melisandre.

And Stannis is pretty much an atheist, if she was not promising him that he would be King he would have no reason to have her around.

"I stopped believing in gods the day I saw the Windproud break up across the bay. Any gods so monstrous as to drown my mother and father would never have my worship, I vowed. In King’s Landing, the High Septon would prattle at me of how all justice and goodness flowed from the Seven, but all I ever saw of either was made by men.

What did Edric do?

Slaughter? Not that we know of. It was a battle between Florents who wanted to join Stannis and those that didnt.

And is Tarly not doing his duty, following the Tyrells orders?

Ned said that without knowing that Stannis had known (at least strongly suspected) the truth about Cersei's children.

1. He sided with his brother over his king, this is what matters. There is nothing in the text that suggests he didn't do so willingly.

2. We get two important informations from Cersei here: 1., continued "meddling" (investigating about the incest) caused her to kill Robert, and 2., she didn't want to kill him before her brothers were "dealt with". Stannis had no way of knowing Eddard would figure the incest out. He acted according to the situation, in a way that was least likely to get both Stannis and Robert killed.

3. No, as my quote above suggests. He says it's not about the crown, but about "saving millions".

4. I know he is generally an atheist. That doesn't stop him from believing Mel's warnings in that instance.

5. What did Stannis do to him?

6. 

7.

Lord Tarly has seized Renly's stores and put a great many to the sword; Florents, chiefly.

There's nothing about a battle, and there doesn't seem to be enough time for Mace to order him to kill those men. 

8. No, read again.

Lord Stannis shared the secret Jon Arryn had died for, he was certain of it.

What is "the secret Jon Arryn had died for", if not the incest?

[Jamie Lannister]

Pretty harsh to lump Stannis in with those three. I've always considered him a flawed, but well-intentioned and morally complex anti-hero who hates the things he pushes himself to do for the greater good.

In contrast to the guy who wiped out two dynasties for getting uppity, and that other guy who doesn't mind rape, abduction, murder and mayhem so long as you're discreet about it.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

 

1. He sided with his brother over his king, this is what matters. There is nothing in the text that suggests he didn't do so willingly.

As did Renly.

 

2. We get two important informations from Cersei here: 1., continued "meddling" (investigating about the incest) caused her to kill Robert, and 2., she didn't want to kill him before her brothers were "dealt with". Stannis had no way of knowing Eddard would figure the incest out. He acted according to the situation, in a way that was least likely to get both Stannis and Robert killed.

Robert was killed. Exactly how much worse could it have been had Stannis got involved? Double killed?

Not only did his brother die because of his inaction but it is possible the War of the Five kings could have been prevented (or at least lessened)

 

3. No, as my quote above suggests. He says it's not about the crown, but about "saving millions".

He could have saved 'millions' by supporting either of his brothers as King.

4. I know he is generally an atheist. That doesn't stop him from believing Mel's warnings in that instance.

Sure, because she tolf him what he wanted to hear. That he was the bestest and no one else should be King as he is Azor Ahai reborn.

5. What did Stannis do to him?

ah so we have come to an impasse. Both Tarly and Stannis didnt kill Sam/Edric only threatened to.

 

There's nothing about a battle, and there doesn't seem to be enough time for Mace to order him to kill those men. 

Was he not with Loras at the time?

8. No, read again.

What is "the secret Jon Arryn had died for", if not the incest?

That is the point. Ned does not know when he says that in chapter 33. He is convinced that the Lannisters have done something and killed Jon Arryn over it. He has no idea what it is when he makes that quote.

[dRagonese]

Really? What he did to Sam is exactly the same what Stannis did to Shireen?

what did stannis do to shireen except show unconditional love shireen is alive and well if your going by canon and not some nimbly bibly story concocted by the brothers D 

[Minsc]

what did stannis do to shireen except show unconditional love

When?  Stannis never interacts with her and rarely talks about her.

[John Doe]

As did Renly.

 

Robert was killed. Exactly how much worse could it have been had Stannis got involved? Double killed?

Not only did his brother die because of his inaction but it is possible the War of the Five kings could have been prevented (or at least lessened)

 

He could have saved 'millions' by supporting either of his brothers as King.

Sure, because she tolf him what he wanted to hear. That he was the bestest and no one else should be King as he is Azor Ahai reborn.

Was he not with Loras at the time?

That is the point. Ned does not know when he says that in chapter 33. He is convinced that the Lannisters have done something and killed Jon Arryn over it. He has no idea what it is when he makes that quote.

1. Who was a child who had no say in the matter and probably didn't even fully understand the situation. Renly had no other choice than stick with his family as he was only 4-5 years old when the siege began. Stannis made a choice, that is the difference.

2. He could not know Eddard would figure the incest out so fast and thereby endanger Robert. He decision was, at that point, the least likely to get both Baratheon brothers killed by his actions. If anything Robert getting killed was Ned's fault, not Stannis'.

3. He supported Robert and Renly had no right to the throne. Also how would that have saved millions?

4. That's your interpretation. Judging by how conflicted he was about Edric it's not all about what he wants to hear,

5. I'm not sure, I don't think it's mentioned. The only thing I remember about Loras is that he departed with a fifth of Renly's knights.

6. When did his opinion that Stannis shared Arryn's secret change? If that is what you claim you have to prove it. It says Eddard is certain Stannis departed because he shared Arryn's secret, and unless this statement is contraedicted after the secret is revealed, this is what we have to go by.