If Jon becomes King , who will be his Queen ?

[kissdbyfire]

26 minutes ago, The Fattest Leech said:

And speaking of Val and Ghost... this has always been one of my favorite passages. I read it and I am sucked right in. The new digs Val is wearing here are most likely ceremonial in nature.

I would not be surprised if Jon and Val take a carved weirwood face as a sigil later. There are, and will be, many links between the old gods, Jon, Ghost, Val, Morna and Bran within the trees and clearly the weirwood face is important.

A Dance with Dragons - Jon XI

From above came the sudden sound of wings. Mormont's raven flapped from a limb of an old oak to perch upon Jon's saddle. "Corn," it cried. "Corn, corn, corn."

"Did you follow me as well?" Jon reached to shoo the bird away but ended up stroking its feathers. The raven cocked its eye at him. "Snow," it muttered, bobbing its head knowingly. Then Ghost emerged from between two trees, with Val beside him.

They look as though they belong together. Val was clad all in white; white woolen breeches tucked into high boots of bleached white leather, white bearskin cloak pinned at the shoulder with a carved weirwood face, white tunic with bone fastenings. Her breath was white as well … but her eyes were blue, her long braid the color of dark honey, her cheeks flushed red from the cold. It had been a long while since Jon Snow had seen a sight so lovely.

I adore this passage.  

A carved weirwood face as sigil is perfect! And Morna can officiate before a heart tree. 

[The Fattest Leech]

On 7/3/2016 at 5:50 PM, DutchArya said:

I think you have that wrong. Jon loved Ygritte. He is attracted to Val but put that to one side when he was faced with saving Arya. 

I see what you did there

True. Jon wants to ride out when provoked by the pink letter... but Jon also tries to desert when he hears of his father being beheaded and feels the call to join Robb's army, and feels guilty when he can't. Jon will always be honor-bound and loyal to his Stark family. Both his home and his family were under attack in that letter. (And the NW, but who cares about them)

Of the love lives of the main characters, each one is given the marriage for duty, marriage for love. Jon was actually ordered to fall in with the wildlings and sleeping with Ygritte was at first, duty. Jon did fall in a first-time love with Ygritte. But this was when Jon was still virtually a seedling. He has grown into a mighty oak and will fully leaf-up when he is healed and has his dragon puberty like Dany did. 

 

[Stormourne]

1 hour ago, kissdbyfire said:

I beg to differ. I don't think a Jon/Val match would have anything to do with Val being a princess. Like, not at all. The wildlings see Val as an accomplished, independent, intelligent, brave woman in her own right. 

What would be the benefit, though? Jon needs an army, once he is resurrected. The wildlings will fight for him regardless. They don't see Val as a princess; so marrying her won't make a difference. So, would this be a marriage of love? As I've quoted, only peasants marry for love

[Stormourne]

1 hour ago, The Fattest Leech said:

You kinda already answered part of your question.

To the Bold. Mance sees the value in Jon and Mance will follow Jon. Look at the mission Mance was agreed to take on. Even the six women did their best and died for the mission. The wildlings will follow Jon, the guy that risked his life to get them to safety through the wall and at Hardhome.

To the Underline. These qualities are important to the southron houses. Even Val knows this when she once, hestitantly but dutifully, kneels to Selyse. A union between Jon and Val will appease both sides.. after a little more settling. It won't happen overnight (mostly).

Val will be majorly important. GRRM stated a long time ago that his characters and the story will be introduced in three acts. She was introduced as part of the second act.  What info we do have about Val is already immense and will just point out a few things to start with:

1. Val is a healer and of the Old Gods, as Jon sees Ghost is and then realizes that he, himself, is also of the Old Gods. Jon is already connecting the two of them here.
2. Having  healer of the Old Gods like Val and Morna white mask around while you are stabbed to death is going to come in way more useful than what Mel has to offer.
3. Jon is also starting to see himself more a wildling by the mid- end of Dance.
4. Val sings to the "Little Monster" and we have already seen in Essos and Westeros that different witches sing spells. Val is protecting the wildling baby because she knows she has to leave and she wants the baby safe. She passes it off to Jon playfully as , "I can't help it if the baby happens to hear me sing."
5. Jon has a romantic thing for her but feels he is not worthy on some level because he is a bastard. Honestly, the way Jon feels about himself compared to Val and the whole highborn-prince-princess thing could be a thread on it's own. The phrase "you know nothing Jon Snow" carries over to here. Jon still knows nothing about himself and how he would be worthy of the wildling princess. (He is the prince that was promised).
6. Jon already "stole" Val when Stannis came riding in and sacked Mance's camp outside the wall. Val asks about Jarl and this event twice (?) just to make sure. Again, "you know nothing Jon Snow" because he is the only one that does not see it yet.
7. Most importantly, she is well respected within the entire wilding community and can travel unmolested and even aided by different clans. When Jon secretly sends her out, she comes back as promised and when promised. She is competent and loyal.
8. The passage I put below shows how Jon thinks of Val, and what he wants long term. But again, we the readers know what Jon is still blind to. He needs to still open his eyes like Ghost when he found the wolf as a pup. Ghost was the only one with his eyes already open.
9. Ghost really likes her, and we all know that if your dog doesn't like your girlfriend/boyfriend, then it's time to break up
   1. Mel uses potions and Magic once to fool Ghost into coming over to her while Mel used a "small" glamour to make herself look like Ygritte for a moment to lure Jon over to her. Mel was a false disguise. Val was true.
10. When Jon stole Val, the constellation "Thief" was in the "Moonmaid". Mormont's raven calls Jon a "thief" several times.
    1. Jon refers to Val looking very "moonish" and silvery when their breath mingles in the air. Again with the repetition of the Moon and Stars attraction theme for the main characters in the story.
11. Stannis sees the high worth of Val and tries to marry her off to the higherborn knights in his service. We all know that ain't happening! Jon does know this... which is very curious. But no matter, because whoever Stannis puts in Winterfell, Val comes with the castle.

A Storm of Swords - Jon XII

Ygritte wanted me to be a wildling. Stannis wants me to be the Lord of Winterfell. But what do I want? The sun crept down the sky to dip behind the Wall where it curved through the western hills. Jon watched as that towering expanse of ice took on the reds and pinks of sunset. Would I sooner be hanged for a turncloak by Lord Janos, or forswear my vows, marry Val, and become the Lord of Winterfell? It seemed an easy choice when he thought of it in those terms . . . though if Ygritte had still been alive, it might have been even easier. Val was a stranger to him. She was not hard on the eyes, certainly, and she had been sister to Mance Rayder's queen, but still . . .

I would need to steal her if I wanted her love, but she might give me children. I might someday hold a son of my own blood in my arms. A son was something Jon Snow had never dared dream of, since he decided to live his life on the Wall. I could name him Robb. Val would want to keep her sister's son, but we could foster him at Winterfell, and Gilly's boy as well. Sam would never need to tell his lie. We'd find a place for Gilly too, and Sam could come visit her once a year or so. Mance's son and Craster's would grow up brothers, as I once did with Robb.

He wanted it, Jon knew then. He wanted it as much as he had ever wanted anything. I have always wanted it, he thought, guiltily. May the gods forgive me. It was a hunger inside him, sharp as a dragonglass blade. A hunger . . . he could feel it. It was food he needed, prey, a red deer that stank of fear or a great elk proud and defiant. He needed to kill and fill his belly with fresh meat and hot dark blood. His mouth began to water with the thought.

I don't care who Jon marries. I just want there to be some awkward, less-than-innocent feelings going on with Arya that will torment them both. Come on George, you started writing Asoiaf with them in mind... so give me at least this much!

Don't blame me because I've become desensitized to the idea of incest in fiction. ^^ I just love those two to death (Don't die, pleaseeee).

[The Fattest Leech]

2 hours ago, Dawn of Fyre said:

I don't care who Jon marries. I just want there to be some awkward, less-than-innocent feelings going on with Arya that will torment them both. Come on George, you started writing Asoiaf with them in mind... so give me at least this much!

Don't blame me because I've become desensitized to the idea of incest in fiction. ^^ I just love those two to death (Don't die, pleaseeee).

I gotcha! No worries.

I know this will break many other hearts, but, George apparently did change his mind early on because just last month at Balticon he answered a few questions about that timeline and admitted that, "I made shit up," when it came time to submit and sell his series to a publisher. This was before the first book was 100% complete. Now a days, if you are a writer and want to submit to an agent or publishing house, they hardly ever ask for outlines for literary fiction. Instead, they want the frickin' dreaded query letter . Those things are harder to write than the story is.

Back on topic. I saw your quote about only peasants marrying for love, weelll, that is not a really a rule in this ASOIAF world, so not one we should consider as canon. As a matter of fact, there are two semi-recent Targaryens who did marry secretly for love. King Jaehaerys 2 & Shaera. They are Jon's great-grandparents from Rhaegar.

[TheDemonicStark]

Jeyne Poole. She was forced to pretend to be Arya Stark to marry Ramsay, and will probably see Jon as her saviour. When he comes back.

[redtree]

8 hours ago, Julia H. said:

Roose Bolton killed Robb because he wanted to be the Lord Paramount of the North and he was evil enough to betray and kill for material gain and also because a nearly continent-wide war gave him the opportunity. 

That's a very selective memory, you forgot that Robb also screwed the Frey therefore losing 4k of his army and an important bridge. He couldn't even cross via Vale and his Armada wasn't even close to ready yet he put his precious honor instead of seeing that he's in the middle of a war and that bridge is highly important. Robb chose to protect Jeyne's honor, a girl from enemy's region that he had known for a day and forgot he had a bigger cause which is the North and Riverland. He prefered to save her instead of ensuring the safety of his people, his family, and his bannermen who had bled and died for him.  

A great leader will put his cause first instead of his personal interest, what Robb did was the otherwise, and worse because his personal interest automatically screwed his cause. No one would've cared if he slept with tavern girl if that was his personal interest because that wouldn't have affected the war but he married someone else whose house only supported 1/80th of his former betrothed and let that 80x bigger army go. He traded 4k army+a gravely important channel for what, a dozen knights. Even Catelyn was horrified at his doing

Is Roose innocent ? off course not, but is Robb a terrible politician ? certainly. That above says something about his quality

[No Regard Carrenard]

On July 2, 2016 at 5:40 PM, LordImp said:

Straightfoward , if Jon ends up as King of 7 Kingdoms in the end who will be his Queen ? 

 

Candidates:

Val - Very likely 

Daeneryrs Targaryen - Doubtful , because if Dany lives til the end i think she will he Queen not a consort

Arya Stark - The most likely option IMO 

Sansa Stark - More likely with Arya IMO

Margaery Tyrell - Nah

Arianne Martell - Think she dies 

Asha Greyjoy - Doubt that a Greyjoy will ever be consort to anyone 

Allyria Dayne - Why not ? 

Mya Stone - Nah

Some randen northern noblewoman - Could be

Some Frey girl - Doubt it 

Some Lannister girl - Nah 

Elia Sand - Maybe 

Who do you think ? IMO Arya is the most likely option , then Daenerys , then Sansa and then Allyria Dayne. 

 

Edit: Val added to the list 

 

[No Regard Carrenard]

If Jon was to marry Arya wouldn't that just be out of love? There is no political reason to marry her, she is a Lady of any house unless she's granted Harrenhal thru her granny. 

[The Fattest Leech]

14 minutes ago, No Regard Carrenard said:

If Jon was to marry Arya wouldn't that just be out of love? There is no political reason to marry her, she is a Lady of any house unless she's granted Harrenhal thru her granny. 

Could have been if George stuck to the original outline, but he didn't and then George said he was making stuff up in the outline and that any remarks about Ygritte compared to Arya were because Jon had little experience with other females and Ygritte seemed familiar.

Now, if Arya wants Jon and can't have him, that would be a twist to fulfill the "bittersweet" ending if done right.

[TheDemonicStark]

Jeyne Poole. Fake Arya Stark.

 

Remember what the final shipping would have been, may I add, in the Trilogy as was first planned. Arya x Jon.

And just where is Jeyne, the fake Arya, heading? To Jon. 

A clever, blatant and not so subtle nod to what GRRM originally had planned.

[Julia H.]

10 hours ago, Boarsbane said:

You think Greatjon is a man to make idle threats? He's an idiot, testing Robb with idle threats would never occur to him. Also I'm pretty sure he drew his sword on Robb which gives Robb an excuse to kill him if he wants, don't think he'd go that far for a test. It's obvious Greatjon valued his own pride over Ned's life but Robb forcefully put him in his place.

It says they're too stupid to realize they have disloyal bannerman and that they don't inspire enough respect or fear to keep their bannerman in line. Roose Bolton never would of killed Tywin because he'd of either been scared to act against him or Tywin would of realized what he was and had him killed. 

What do any of those people have to do with the Starks?

Indeed, says something about the loyalty of their bannermen. 

 

OK, so you are saying that Robb put the Greatjon forcefully in his place to make him loyal. Next you are saying that the Starks don't inspire enough respect or fear to keep their bannermen in line. Hm.

Bannermen were scared to act against Tywin because everyone remembered the Reynes of Castamere. Tywin had earned this "loyalty" by annihilating a whole family and their household down to the youngest baby for a relatively minor offence. That doesn't make him the ideal ruler or leader in my eyes, but each to their own. If that is what you mean by great leadership, then our definition of the word is simply different. 

Despite the Boltons' betrayal, the true extent of the loyalty of the North to the Starks can be seen after their fall. Which other House that has fallen out of power have we seen to still inspire so much loyalty? When "the Tywin's little girl" - after Tywin's death - was paraded naked in the streets of King's Landing, her own subjects were leering and shouting very disloyal things to her and no one was prepared to die to save her. In contrast, Northerners have marched against the Boltons and risked their lives just to save the Ned's little girl from the psychopath, even though Ned is dead and Robb is dead. When the Ned's little son was on the run and Northerners knew the Boltons were chasing him, no one betrayed him even though he was seen and recognized. Also: "Bear Island knows no king but the King in the North, whose name is Stark." The Manderlys are also fiercely loyal to the Starks through and through. Those are instances of true loyalty, not based on fear or on lack of opportunity to betray. 

Why did I mention those real life people? The argument here seems to be that the fact that Robb was betrayed and assassinated shows how poor rulers the Starks (all of them?) are and how little loyalty they inspire (even though there are numerous examples that indicate very strong loyalty in bannermen other than the Boltons). There is no such rule that the assassin is always right and that anyone who is assassinated deserves it or that the assassination is due to the victim's incompetence or lack of ability to inspire loyalty. 

3 hours ago, redtree said:

That's a very selective memory, you forgot that Robb also screwed the Frey therefore losing 4k of his army and an important bridge. He couldn't even cross via Vale and his Armada wasn't even close to ready yet he put his precious honor instead of seeing that he's in the middle of a war and that bridge is highly important. Robb chose to protect Jeyne's honor, a girl from enemy's region that he had known for a day and forgot he had a bigger cause which is the North and Riverland. He prefered to save her instead of ensuring the safety of his people, his family, and his bannermen who had bled and died for him.  

A great leader will put his cause first instead of his personal interest, what Robb did was the otherwise, and worse because his personal interest automatically screwed his cause. No one would've cared if he slept with tavern girl if that was his personal interest because that wouldn't have affected the war but he married someone else whose house only supported 1/80th of his former betrothed and let that 80x bigger army go. He traded 4k army+a gravely important channel for what, a dozen knights. Even Catelyn was horrified at his doing

Is Roose innocent ? off course not, but is Robb a terrible politician ? certainly. That above says something about his quality

No need to be sarcastic about my memory. It is more than probable that the Freys and consequently the Boltons would have betrayed Robb anyway after Renly was killed, the Tyrell army joined the Lannisters and Stannis was defeated in King's Landing. I can't imagine the Freys taking the side of the smaller army (especially given Walder Frey's grudge against the Tullys) and the Boltons would have realized that regardless of who Robb was going to marry. However, if you say that Robb made mistakes, I will agree with that. (I don' think Robb was promoting his own interest when he married Jeyne though - he protected her honour, not even his own. He was chivalrous to a fault rather than selfish.) But is that proof that the Starks as such are terrible rulers and unable to inspire loyalty? No. How old was Robb when he became a lord, an army commander and a king? He started his rule with war and without having time to test his bannermen's loyalty in safer circumstances, without having the time and the opportunity lo learn from his mistakes. How many other rulers were at that age in a similar situation?  

The Boltons are just one family, and they have always been the Starks' rivals. Despite Robb's mistakes and the ultimate defeat, the North has remained very pro-Stark. That certainly suggests that they are able to inspire great and true loyalty.

[TheDemonicStark]

Has anyone read my posts about Jon Snow x Jeyne Poole/Fake Arya?

[redtree]

2 hours ago, Julia H. said:

No need to be sarcastic about my memory. It is more than probable that the Freys and consequently the Boltons would have betrayed Robb anyway after Renly was killed, the Tyrell army joined the Lannisters and Stannis was defeated in King's Landing. I can't imagine the Freys taking the side of the smaller army (especially given Walder Frey's grudge against the Tullys) and the Boltons would have realized that regardless of who Robb was going to marry.

Maybe yes, maybe not, but during RW Walder said specifically that he was pissed because his daughter/granddaughter got spurned and he said sarcasm at Robb that he'd make an apology, like Robb did, and it'd mend them all again. Cat understood that it was betrayal for betrayal

2 hours ago, Julia H. said:

However, if you say that Robb made mistakes, I will agree with that. (I don' think Robb was promoting his own interest when he married Jeyne though - he protected her honour, not even his own. He was chivalrous to a fault rather than selfish.) 

That was both chivalrous and incredibly stupid. And protecting her honor is personal interest. Her honor should be placed way below the lifelihood of his bannermen, his people, his family and his region. Less stupid than Brandon, but still, if Hoster were alive he'd probably call him a gallant fool too. Robb was fit to be army general but politician, no, he needs more to be Cat and less of Ned to be a decent one. 
 

2 hours ago, Julia H. said:

But is that proof that the Starks as such are terrible rulers and unable to inspire loyalty? No. How old was Robb when he became a lord, an army commander and a king? He started his rule with war and without having time to test his bannermen's loyalty in safer circumstances, without having the time and the opportunity lo learn from his mistakes. How many other rulers were at that age in a similar situation?  

The Boltons are just one family, and they have always been the Starks' rivals. Despite Robb's mistakes and the ultimate defeat, the North has remained very pro-Stark. That certainly suggests that they are able to inspire great and true loyalty.

Julia H, i think you tend to widen the topic and connect it to the points that i argue even though those 2 are different. If you get back to my reply, i said "True, anyone can be betrayed, but the million dollar question is why did the traitor do that ? What did the leader do ? It's not everything but it says something about leadership qualities." It was the general concept of your statement that i argued, it has nothing to do with Starks at all. My point was simple, if someone were betrayed then see at the why and how factor to analyze it clearly, this is politic not personal relationship betrayal. You claimed that betrayal has no bearing about leadership qualities and i disagree, that's all.

[bemused]

1 hour ago, TheDemonicStark said:

Has anyone read my posts about Jon Snow x Jeyne Poole/Fake Arya?

I've read the one upthread on this page.

I think Jon and Jeyne Poole would be a horrible idea, and very unlikely to happen. Everyone in the north will come to know what happened to her and she'd be the object of pity by the sympathetic or scorn by the callous (and whispered about by everyone). ... The poor girl needs rest in a safe sanctuary after the hell she's been through, and may never be able to have a normal relationship.

However, it wouldn't surprise me if Jon arranges just such a sanctuary for her ... perhaps through Tycho Nestoris.

[Stormourne]

4 hours ago, No Regard Carrenard said:

If Jon was to marry Arya wouldn't that just be out of love? There is no political reason to marry her, she is a Lady of any house unless she's granted Harrenhal thru her granny. 

I was thinking that if a Daenarys/Jon political marriage occurs - to unify Westeros, why must he fall in love with her? Wouldn't it be tragic if he falls in love with his cousin who he'll always view as his little sister? Would be an interesting read.

[Stormourne]

4 hours ago, The Fattest Leech said:

Could have been if George stuck to the original outline, but he didn't and then George said he was making stuff up in the outline and that any remarks about Ygritte compared to Arya were because Jon had little experience with other females and Ygritte seemed familiar.

Now, if Arya wants Jon and can't have him, that would be a twist to fulfill the "bittersweet" ending if done right.

Sources? I would like to read where George actually said that. And why can't it be that Jon wants Arya and can't have her?

[Julia H.]

1 hour ago, redtree said:

Maybe yes, maybe not, but during RW Walder said specifically that he was pissed because his daughter/granddaughter got spurned and he said sarcasm at Robb that he'd make an apology, like Robb did, and it'd mend them all again. Cat understood that it was betrayal for betrayal

Yes, Walder Frey was angry. But even he hadn't been, he would have calculated the pros and cons very carefully. Robb was to marry the Frey girl only after the war, which meant after he had won the war...

1 hour ago, redtree said:

That was both chivalrous and incredibly stupid. And protecting her honor is personal interest. Her honor should be placed way below the lifelihood of his bannermen, his people, his family and his region. Less stupid than Brandon, but still, if Hoster were alive he'd probably call him a gallant fool too. Robb was fit to be army general but politician, no, he needs more to be Cat and less of Ned to be a decent one. 
 

As I said, Robb was very young and inexperienced. He made mistakes but he also had some very promising qualities. We simply don't know what kind of ruler he would have become if he had had a bit more time to learn. 

1 hour ago, redtree said:

Julia H, i think i see a habit here. You tend to widen the topic and connect it to the points that i argue even though those 2 are different. If you get back to my reply, i said "True, anyone can be betrayed, but the million dollar question is why did the traitor do that ? What did the leader do ? It's not everything but it says something about leadership qualities." It was the general concept of you statement that i argued, it has nothing to do with Starks at all. My point was simple, if someone were betrayed then see at the why and how factor to analyze it clearly, this is politic not personal relationship betrayal. You claimed that betrayal has no bearing about leadership qualities and i disagree, that's all. I didn't even say anything about Northern lords loyalty or generalizing Starks as terrible rulers

In the general context of the discussion, it did seem that the fact that Robb was betrayed and assassinated was mentioned as a sign that the Starks are unable to inspire loyalty and are bad rulers - the comment I originally responded to.

Quote

" True, not one westerlords ever said that but also not one lord from westerland has ever stick a blade through a Lannister lord and occupy Casterly Rock." 

If you say that your original comment was unrelated to the argument that had come up regarding the Starks, namely that they were in general unfit to rule, then I clearly misunderstood you. On the other hand, if you changed the topic somewhere along the way, well, it's good to know.

Other than that, I indeed think that being betrayed by a single bannerman whose interests are clearly different from yours and who isn't guided by any moral considerations in itself does not reflect much on the victim's qualities - precisely because it is politics and many factors are involved, and especially when that betrayal is contrasted with the undying loyalty of many others. (Real history also shows that real life politicians who were assassinated should not necessarily be considered failures.) Incidentally, I also think that the kind of personal failure that results in the head of a family being killed by his own son reflects more on the victim's personal qualities, at least on the victims failure to  raise a healthy, normally functioning family - especially when the other two children of the victim also display clear signs of a dysfunctional family life. 

[redtree]

1 hour ago, Julia H. said:

Yes, Walder Frey was angry. But even he hadn't been, he would have calculated the pros and cons very carefully. Robb was to marry the Frey girl only after the war, which meant after he had won the war...

Again, maybe yes maybe no. But it did look like from words exchange during RW that Robb marrying Jeyne was the tipping point

1 hour ago, Julia H. said:

As I said, Robb was very young and inexperienced. He made mistakes but he also had some very promising qualities. We simply don't know what kind of ruler he would have become if he had had a bit more time to learn. 

Maybe, if only he listened more to Catelyn he could had been a better ruler. Unfortunate that he died before he has the chance
 

1 hour ago, Julia H. said:

In the general context of the discussion, it did seem that the fact that Robb was betrayed and assassinated was mentioned as a sign that the Starks are unable to inspire loyalty and are bad rulers - the comment I originally responded to.

If you say that your original comment was unrelated to the argument that had come up regarding the Starks, namely that they were in general unfit to rule, then I clearly misunderstood you. On the other hand, if you changed the topic somewhere along the way, well, it's good to know.

My first comment was more about Westerland lords in comparison to Northern lords to add boarsbane's point. It wasn't meant as a hint that Robb are unable to inspire loyalty and generalizing Starks as bad rulers. And the comment on page 7 was an argument to your statement in general, the point that i quoted and replied in that made no mention of any house so it was a rather broad statement

1 hour ago, Julia H. said:

Other than that, I indeed think that being betrayed by a single bannerman whose interests are clearly different from yours and who isn't guided by any moral considerations in itself does not reflect much on the victim's qualities - precisely because it is politics and many factors are involved, and especially when that betrayal is contrasted with the undying loyalty of many others. (Real history also shows that real life politicians who were assassinated should not necessarily be considered failures.) Incidentally, I also think that the kind of personal failure that results in the head of a family being killed by his own son reflects more on the victim's personal qualities, at least on the victims failure to  raise a healthy, normally functioning family - especially when the other two children of the victim also display clear signs of a dysfunctional family life. 

Those are new additions to the explanation. At first you said "my main point was that anybody can be betrayed and tyrants are sometimes better at guarding their own safety. It says nothing about anyone's leadership qualities. " so i took it in a very general context and made opinions based on that. 

Let's just say that we disagree on this thing, i personally believe that betrayal by bannerman says something about the overlord's quality. It doesn't mean that the betrayal is always justified and good or that the said overlord is a lousy leader but the reason of the deed, the how and why, should paint a clear picture about their personality, either positive or negative.

Also, new additions to the personal failure stuff. Your first argument only mentioned dysfunctional family, the new one is just specified to Tywin, coincidentally, Robb's enemy. 

[HallowedMarcus]

On ‎06‎/‎07‎/‎2016 at 4:38 AM, Boarsbane said:

You say that like it's a bad thing

Considering this is Novel called A Song of Ice and Fire which is based on a prophecy and is eponymous called The song of ice and fire which says that the Prince who is promised will come from that line with 3 heads, which is said to ovewrcome the new Long Night..YES it would be said. But happen it will not!

 

P.S.: And by the way you sound like a Lannister from Casterly Rock.