Baratheons are quite unsympathetic really

[Jon's Queen Consort]

1 minute ago, King Endymion Targaryen said:

Robert was kind and good-hearted too, but he was also a terrible husband and father.

It depends. He was a good father to the kinds he knew that he had since he provided for them and he had tried to marry his marriage work so, it wasn't his fault that the marriage didn't worked.

2 minutes ago, King Endymion Targaryen said:

Stannis doesn't care if someone is highborn or lowborn but his is not kind and good-hearted.

My point is that you said that she wasn't like the rest of the family and I proved you that she was. Also another example is the Laughing Storm, he was kind, good hearted and didn't cared if someone was highborn or lowborn.

[Khal BlackfyreO]

14 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

I completely and utterly disagree.

Lyonel risked his life in order to help a hedge knight and rebelled only after his daughter was gravely insulted.

Robert liked sex and drinking sure. But at the same time he wasn’t a cruel man, he had sent his own master to help one of his enemies, he was generous and charismatic. Heck even Barri told that Robert was a good man.

Stannis might be uptight and somehow humorless but he is a really just, who cares about what someone’s  actions not about where he was born, a man who knows who is the real enemy , a brave man and one of the best strategist in GRRTH.

 

Every family have good persons and bad persond, like Borros. I believe that the Targs are by far the worse family in Westerosi history.

Lyonel seems awesome, and we have already seen that spurning an arranged wedding can have 'drastic' consequences, it seems to be quite the insult, though that is hard for us to see today.  It also seems that there is a history, like we see with Borros, Lyonel, and Duncan, of the Targaryens seeing the Baratheons as 'unworthy' of them, even though their founding member was most likely a bastard Targaryen (or maybe because of it), and that kind of thing magnifies any slights between them. 

Robert was a decent enough guy, he should have been better, and controlled himself more, but his faults weren´t the worst you could have.  Possibly the worst things against him come in his relationship with Cersei, but at the same time, that relationship itself is worth a topic all of its own.  Obviously Robert was a philanderer already, unlikely to change, but would he have been a drunkard too if it weren´t for Cersei?  Would Cersei drink so much if it weren´t for Robert?  They did not have a healthy relationship AT ALL, and its not really clear who was more at fault.  Was Cersei always a superbitch? Was it a result of their relationship?  She shows a different side with her kids and with Jaimie, but at the same time she killed her friend when she was just a teenager and doesn´t even seem to feel much remorse for it, so I´m going to go with 'always.'

And how much of what Robert became was because of Cersei? We could go on and on, but that was a case where somebody should have spurned somebody and started a minor rebellion and everybody would have been much better off in the end. 

6 hours ago, Ser Ronan Storm said:

Nah, the Baratheon's are alright. I love that the major 3 in the series cover a huge swath of the sexuality spectrum. Robert loves all the women, Renly loves all the men and Stannis appears to be asexual (Mel likely had to use some witchy potion/powder to ignite his lust).

It's true, they are unsympathetic: Robert was a sot who couldn't master himself, Renly was an entitled little snot and Stannis is incredibly unlikable in spite of being the most competent leader vying for the Iron Throne. What makes them compelling is how they are viewed by other characters. Ned's admiration for Robert, and what we are told of him in his Rebellion days, makes me like Robert. The way Renly brilliantly usurps most of the army that ought to be Stannis's after Robert's death makes me admire him, but his ego sobers me right up. And Stannis's own sarcasm and his sense of justice, as revealed by others, makes me cheer for him. But I never forget each man's flaws.

Even the Lannisters have Tyrion, Jaime, Genna and Daven that I can cheer for, despite the Lannisters killing everything I love. It's just one of the most beautiful aspects of GRRM's writing.

Respect.

[devilish]

5 minutes ago, King Endymion Targaryen said:

Robert was kind and good-hearted too, but he was also a terrible husband and father.

Stannis doesn't care if someone is highborn or lowborn but his is not kind and good-hearted.

When exactly did Robert shown to be kind and good hearted?

[Khal BlackfyreO]

1 hour ago, King Merrett I Frey said:

Orys also took a cruel vengeance on Wyl's son, Walter.  

Baratheons represent Righteous Fury.

 

Freys represent Whiny b%&$" haters.

 

[Endymion I Targaryen]

2 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

It depends. He was a good father to the kinds he knew that he had since he provided for them and he had tried to marry his marriage work so, it wasn't his fault that the marriage didn't worked.

 

My point is that you said that she wasn't like the rest of the family and I proved you that she was. Also another example is the Laughing Storm, he was kind, good hearted and didn't cared if someone was highborn or lowborn.

When a marriage doesn't work both are wrong.Publicly humiliating his wife (no matter how much she deserved it) was not good at all. For me Family = father,mother,siblings,uncles, grandparents so my point is right.  I know nothing about The Laughing Storm.But because I am good hearted too I believe you 

[Jon Fossoway]

4 hours ago, Khal BlackfyreO said:

Baratheons represent Righteous Fury.

 

Freys represent Whiny b%&$" haters.

 

Ours is the money

[RenlyIsNotRight]

Maybe it just depends on your personality. I've always found the Baratheons, especially Robert and Stannis, to be sympathetic even with some of the more morally questionable things they've done because I identify with a lot of their flaws (hot tempered, spiteful, etc.)

Plus if we're really going to judge the collective sympathy of entire houses, you'd think a house made up of inbred dragon Nazis who believe they are owed the world would be the least sympathetic of all, and yet half the fandom loves them. So idk, to each their own I guess.

[Valens]

Yes, the Targaryens had their share of egomaniacal and tyrannical rulers, but for every Maegor and Aerys II, there was a Jaehaerys I and a Aegon V and Daeron II. So, you cannot just blow them off as "inbred dragon nazis". They are not from Westeros and they are very different from both the First Men and the Andals. It's like the Middle East today, they still practice intermarriage between first cousins and to them that's normal. We are Andals and the First Men, they are Valyrians, in that aspect. But it doesn't mean that WE are better than them in every aspect. Of course not. We, the Europeans and Americans, are more decadent and obsessed with material things while they are less decadent and more focused on things that matter, to them. So, the same thing can be said for the Targaryens-they were obsessed with knowledge also, not just power. Aemon, Aerys I, Daeron II, also Jaehaerys-they were all scholars. Name me a Baratheon that was a true scholar.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

55 minutes ago, Valens said:

Maegor and Aerys II, there was a Jaehaerys I and a Aegon V and Daeron II. 

Definitely and utterly not true.

[Valens]

46 minutes ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Definitely and utterly not true.

Haha-what a surprise! Think I'm just gonna block you and be done with it. I can't be arsed with your hateful comments.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

1 hour ago, Valens said:

Haha-what a surprise! Think I'm just gonna block you and be done with it. I can't be arsed with your hateful comments.

Cool do it I don't give a damn. 

You said that for every great one you have a bad one yet you only have counted the Kings. You also have kinslayers LIKE Aemond, Aegon II, Aegon IV, Dany, Daemon. Mad people like Baelor, Aerys, Aerion, Viserys, Helaena, Aegon V, Maeglor, Rhaegel maybe Aelora and so on.

[drakemunky]

All Baratheons brought sodomy to Westeros in one form or another.

[Khal BlackfyreO]

2 hours ago, Valens said:

Yes, the Targaryens had their share of egomaniacal and tyrannical rulers, but for every Maegor and Aerys II, there was a Jaehaerys I and a Aegon V and Daeron II. So, you cannot just blow them off as "inbred dragon nazis". They are not from Westeros and they are very different from both the First Men and the Andals. It's like the Middle East today, they still practice intermarriage between first cousins and to them that's normal. We are Andals and the First Men, they are Valyrians, in that aspect. But it doesn't mean that WE are better than them in every aspect. Of course not. We, the Europeans and Americans, are more decadent and obsessed with material things while they are less decadent and more focused on things that matter, to them. So, the same thing can be said for the Targaryens-they were obsessed with knowledge also, not just power. Aemon, Aerys I, Daeron II, also Jaehaerys-they were all scholars. Name me a Baratheon that was a true scholar.

'Inbred dragon nazis' Yeah!  You can go with what Aemon said and agree that the gods flipped a coin when a Targaryen was born, Heads=Psycho, Tails=Great Ruler, but this statement is still true.  Lets examine the term 'inbred dragon nazis',

We can start off with that first word 'inbred'.  Were the Targaryens inbred?  YES! They inbred to the bone, and occasionally sprinkled in some non-Targaryen blood, when too many babies were born with tails (didn´t help Dany though), then they went right back to inbreeding.  If your mom or dad was not a Targaryen, chances are you would marry a Targaryen, if not, your cousins definitely would, and your children would for sure.  Inbred...check.

Next we have 'dragon' probably the hardest word to pin down in this term, because its largely imaginative.  What does it mean?  That they were actually fire breathing scaled giant beasts?  Only Aegon IV waking up the morning after fits that description.  Does it mean that they were self proclaimed Dragons, like their sigil?  The same way a Fossoway is an apple and a Stark is a direwolf?  Probably.  And in that case, we can certify that term as valid as well. 

Finally we have 'Nazis.'  And what is was a nazi? A member of a political party?  I don´t think that´s what we are aiming at here, are we?  No, a nazi believed in the uniqueness and general superiority of the people descended from germanic tribes (tribes that, at least in mythological memory, were comprised entirely of blond haired and blue eyed genetic mutants).  The Targaryens upped the anty a little, because their general brand of genetic mutation makes blond haired and blue eyed positively bland.  They have silver hair and purple eyes, just because awesome. But they also believe themselves to be generally superior to other life forms, and that that superiority comes from their blood.  We can find a few exceptions where Targaryens don´t do this, (even though they all seem to be taught this) as we can see with Egg who seems to have this view as a boy and gradually grows out of it through his experiences.  Even other Targs of the 'non-psycho' variety seem to suffer from this misconception. So while nazi carries with it quite a lot of subtext, at east some of the conceptions involved with the term fit the Targaryens.  They are undeniably 'Aryan' (oooh, look at that!) or even 'Ultra-Aryan' in their looks and are generally taught to see themselves as genetically superior to any families from Westeros.  In that light, we can say the Targs are 'nazis'.

There you have it!!  'Inbred dragon nazis' it is!!  All psychos?  Nooooo!  All 'Inbred dragon nazis'?  Pretty much!! 

[Khal BlackfyreO]

You could always change the title to 'Boltons'...

 

[Jon's Queen Consort]

On 25/7/2016 at 4:43 PM, Khal BlackfyreO said:

Robert was a decent enough guy, he should have been better, and controlled himself more, but his faults weren´t the worst you could have.  Possibly the worst things against him come in his relationship with Cersei, but at the same time, that relationship itself is worth a topic all of its own.  Obviously Robert was a philanderer already, unlikely to change, but would he have been a drunkard too if it weren´t for Cersei?  Would Cersei drink so much if it weren´t for Robert?  They did not have a healthy relationship AT ALL, and its not really clear who was more at fault.  Was Cersei always a superbitch? Was it a result of their relationship?  She shows a different side with her kids and with Jaimie, but at the same time she killed her friend when she was just a teenager and doesn´t even seem to feel much remorse for it, so I´m going to go with 'always.

Let's put it like that. From everything we know Robert was hot tempered, sometimes irresponsible and liked to fight, to drink and have sex but he wasn’t cruel or sadist. There is nothing in the books to say that he has hurt someone just for pleasure and from what even people who didn't liked him say we learn that he was a good man.

Cersei on the other hand has shown some disturbing signs since she was very young. She abused her baby brother when she was 7, killed her friend when she was 10, manipulated her twin when she was a teen. She later enjoyed torturing, maiming and killing.

Their marriage was bad but at least at the beginning Robert had tried to make the marriage work, in his own way sure but at least he had tried. Cersei on the other hand had never tried to do the same and had declined Robert’s efforts. From what we know she wasn’t willing to make an effort for any marriage to work. What she wanted was just people worship her and she would had been pleased with a male copy of herself. In conclusion I believe that the marriage was destined to fail and I blame Cersei because at least Robert had tried to make the wedding to work.

When a marriage doesn't work both are wrong.Publicly humiliating his wife (no matter how much she deserved it) was not good at all. For me Family = father,mother,siblings,uncles, grandparents so my point is right.  I know nothing about The Laughing Storm.But because I am good hearted too I believe you 

I don't remember when Robert publicly humiliated Cersei. But I may had forgotten it. As I said^ I believe that the marriage was destined to fail and I blame Cersei because at least Robert had tried to make the wedding to work.

[devilish]

On 25/07/2016 at 2:47 PM, Khal BlackfyreO said:

Baratheons represent Righteous Fury.

 

Freys represent Whiny b%&$" haters.

 

I am neither a Frey nor a Baratheon fan. However I kind of understand the former more than the latter.

The Freys built their wealth mostly through their own hard work. They were repeatedly look down by the big houses long before Robert's rebellion. Ok, they failed to respond to Hoster Tully's calls during Robert's rebellion. There again the rebel here was Hoster not Walder + Hoster answered to Robert's call only after he secured two great marriage matchups. Walder was given nothing. The Freys kept being humiliated after Robert's rebellion and when they finally decided to join war in response to a deal made with Robb, the young wolf first pulled out of such deal and then he was planning to move North leaving the Riverlands at his enemies mercy.  

The Baratheons owe everything to Aegon Targeryan whom according to rumours shared blood with Orys. The Targs made them Lords of the Stormlands. Ok Rhaegar stole Robert's promised gf (she wasn't his wife yet) and Aerys wanted Robert dead. But there was really a need to kill two innocent children and sent assassins to kill young Danny? What did Danny, Aegon and co did to Robert?

[Jon's Queen Consort]

11 minutes ago, devilish said:

But there was really a need to kill two innocent children 

Two innocent children? Who were they? Because Viserys wasn't a child and Dany was active conspiring to attack Westeros.

[RenlyIsNotRight]

5 hours ago, Valens said:

Yes, the Targaryens had their share of egomaniacal and tyrannical rulers, but for every Maegor and Aerys II, there was a Jaehaerys I and a Aegon V and Daeron II. So, you cannot just blow them off as "inbred dragon nazis". They are not from Westeros and they are very different from both the First Men and the Andals. It's like the Middle East today, they still practice intermarriage between first cousins and to them that's normal. We are Andals and the First Men, they are Valyrians, in that aspect. But it doesn't mean that WE are better than them in every aspect. Of course not. We, the Europeans and Americans, are more decadent and obsessed with material things while they are less decadent and more focused on things that matter, to them. So, the same thing can be said for the Targaryens-they were obsessed with knowledge also, not just power. Aemon, Aerys I, Daeron II, also Jaehaerys-they were all scholars. Name me a Baratheon that was a true scholar.

Without even getting into how that analogy is generally flawed and makes a lot of assumptions on your part, I would definitely not say the Andals and First Men were more decadent and obsessed with material things compared to the Targs. I mean if you want decadence, just look Aegon the Unworthy.

Frankly, its unfair to use historical examples of Targs to compare to the Baratheons or really any other house because their history has been covered so much more than any of the others. But if we limit our scope to the series proper, there's only really been one Targaryen whose been "obsessed with knowledge", that being Rhaegar. His "obsession with knowledge" led to him kidnapping and impregnating a teenaged girl and throwing an entire kingdom into war and bloodshed as a result of it, not to mention his selfish neglect of his wife and children for the sake of it. Hardly sounds like leader material to me.

[OuttaOldtown]

4 minutes ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Two innocent children? Who were they? 

He climbed onto his throne over the corpses of children

The Martells rightfully hold him accountable, as he should be as the newly crowned king. Were Tywin or the Mountain and his charged with being murderers? No, Tywin was rewarded with a marriage to his daughter & the Mountain was allowed to continue being the monster he is. To give Robert a total pass is ridiculous and I heavily doubt a Targaryen king would ever be pardoned by the fan base..

[Jon's Queen Consort]

10 minutes ago, OuttaOldtown said:

The Martells rightfully hold him accountable, as he should be as the newly crowned king. Were Tywin or the Mountain and his charged with being murderers? No, Tywin was rewarded with a marriage to his daughter & the Mountain was allowed to continue being the monster he is. To give Robert a total pass is ridiculous and I heavily doubt a Targaryen king would ever be pardoned by the fan base..

I don't recall Martells saying something like that, just the GoT's Oberyn mentioning that Robert wasn't one of those who blamed. In any case, Robert wasn't formally crowned when this happen and it's not logical for someone to punish his most dangerous and powerful new ally for something he did before he had any actual power. By the same logic Robb should had punished Hoster for his crimes before he became the King. Also it wasn't Robert who rewarded Tywin, it was Jon Arryn, if you, in general, have to blame Robert for not ruling but left the ruling to his Hand and small council, you have no reason to blame him for something that he hadn't done. Should he had punished Tywin? In a perfect world where Tywin was a common Lord yes. In Westeros where Tywin wasn't his man from the beginning and he was dangerous and powerful I see no reason to do it since nothing could change.