Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bloodstone Emperor

Who would be the best King from the WoFK

Recommended Posts

On 1/13/2018 at 7:03 AM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Ok they've all inherited regions Stannis having inherited the poorest doesn't in it of itself count as experience with economics.

You're right, it does not. It does contribute to the fact that Stannis's policies did not bankrupt even one of the poorest regions. For a business as lucrative as prostitution, apparently, it doesn't seem that important. 

On 1/13/2018 at 7:03 AM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Stannis took a loan for money for his war effort, not to stabilize an economy.

I know. Point is he partook in an economic activity. Like Jon. I also place Jon above Robb and Joffery. For the same reason. I'm also not going to place some random character above Stannis militarily, since the random character hasn't actually performed any militaristic feats, but hey, they might actually know more! 

On 1/13/2018 at 7:03 AM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

The only real instance we can point of him doing something with relation to buisness, is banning a very lucrative one.

All kinds of lucrative things are banned. Doesn't mean the economic consequences haven't been taken into account. For example, cannabis. Imagine the tax income! 

On 1/13/2018 at 7:03 AM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

 Honestly, it's woefully unfair Stannis is the best in regards to economics when we hadn't actually seen what the other 3 were capable of and the only thing we see of Stannis was something that would obviously hurt the economy.

I'd allow Renly. Joffery, who hasn't done anything other than benefit from the golden spoon inserted into his mouth? Nah. Robb who hasn't actually done anything other than campaigning? Nah. They need to have actually done something. Or at least have ruled a region long enough so that we can confer experience. 

On 1/13/2018 at 7:03 AM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Dany is a queen. Sorry that's playing semantics. A lord is given his power power because of his place in the family to which he is from.

Succession. You're thinking of succession. I pointed out that your place in a family is not where authority comes from. For example, Warden of the East. 

On 1/13/2018 at 7:03 AM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Yes there are a handful (I do mean you could literaly count them on you fingers), of lords who were elevated toward their position because some valor service, but for the rest they were given this right for no other reason than the position they have from the family they are from.

Yes, though it can be removed. Like we have seen in the books. 

On 1/13/2018 at 7:03 AM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

A violation of law.

A king directing who his successor will be? 

On 1/13/2018 at 7:03 AM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

That could be due to his status as a minor no? If not, Joffery would still have the authority to dismiss the council and put in place sychopant-bigger sychopants

Removing someone from a council position, especially if that someone happens to be fairly important, carries about the same amount of weight as granted them a council position. Recall in Dance how Kevan granted the Reach lords council positions to help alleviate conflict. No one would care about the position if it was simply an advisory body. 

On 1/13/2018 at 7:03 AM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

In a few extremely rare cases a peasant having commited a tremendous service to the liege lord of his realm had been granted the title of lord.

Still an example! 

On 1/13/2018 at 7:03 AM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

The other 99.9999999999% got it because of their position in the family to which they are from. Joffery was not granted his kingship (and all the rights that go along with it), because of anything he personally did he was granted it because he seemed to be the oldest living trueborn son of Robert Baratheon.

Well, that's obvious enough. This is how monarchies with primogeniture work. Oldest daughters may also inherit in monarchies (Dorne). You also have elective monarchies (Iron Islands). Law decides how this works. And people change the law, specifically the monarch and/or a council. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Seeeyeare said:

ight, it does not. It does contribute to the fact that Stannis's policies did not bankrupt even one of the poorest regions. For a business as lucrative as prostitution, apparently, it doesn't seem that important. 

Again. We don't know how badly it actually effected the economy. Doubtless anyone would suggest reinstating to solve some of the finacel woes knowing Stannis's feelings regarding it.

 

2 hours ago, Seeeyeare said:

I know. Point is he partook in an economic activity. Like Jon. I also place Jon above Robb and Joffery. For the same reason. I'm also not going to place some random character above Stannis militarily, since the random character hasn't actually performed any militaristic feats, but hey, they might actually know more! 

Quote

Borrowing money to fund his war.

Just doing anything involving money isn't a count of actual experience.

Doudbtless Robb was loaned money as an allowance getting someone to donate money to you is not a point in favor towards you knowing how to use it. I'm not going place a drunken literate peasant above by virtue of having taken a loan to buy more alcohol.

2 hours ago, Seeeyeare said:

A king directing who his successor will be? 

Apologies I misread the statement. Of course a king can name his heir-that doesn't mean another could not be seen to have a superior claim based on the position in their family. A first true born son can still be seen as having precedent over a daughter even if picked. 

2 hours ago, Seeeyeare said:

Yes, though it can be removed. Like we have seen in the books. 

Yes, still doesn't change the fact they were only really granted in the first place because of their place in their family.

 

2 hours ago, Seeeyeare said:

Succession. You're thinking of succession. I pointed out that your place in a family is not where authority comes from. For example, Warden of the East. 

Quote

Yes, primogeniture is how a noble family decides which son is the lit'd of their house. They aren't picked for any other reason.

 

2 hours ago, Seeeyeare said:

e from a council position, especially if that someone happens to be fairly important, carries about the same amount of weight as granted them a council position. Recall in Dance how Kevan granted the Reach lords council positions to help alleviate conflict. No one would care about the position if it was simply an advisory body. 

Quote

That doesn't really have any relevance to what I said. I mean if it just an advisorey position it still a great honor to be hand selected to help the king govern the entire realm, and places you in a position of having direct influence with him. But the question whether or not Joffery can simply replace the small council with people who will always agree with him even as a minor; apparently yes? Would it be wise? Not really. Could he legally do it? Perhaps.

bvious enough. This is how monarchies with primogeniture work. Oldest daughters may also inherit in monarchies (Dorne). You also have elective monarchies (Iron Islands). Law decides how this works. And people change the law, specifically the monarch and/or a council. 

 

Yes. 
 

  •  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Lord Lannister said:

Renly certainly had the charisma and understood how people worked and how to use politics to get what he wanted. Though by his admission his claim was based on nothing more than a selfish desire for power, rather than any lawful merit or moral right. I think that attitude would've bled over into his rule, and he had the potential to become a different version of Robert. Honestly, part of me just thinks he concocted the scheme with Loras so they could be together. Corruption would seem to be destined to flourish under his rule as it did Robert's. His military instincts didn't seem to be all that great either, despite his overwhelming force he never was able to bring it to fully bear against anyone.

Why do people keep saying this? We're literally told his motivation in the book and its confirmed by Cersei:

Lord Renly took a step back, taut as a bowstring. "Every moment you delay gives Cersei another moment to prepare. By the time Robert dies, it may be too late … for both of us."
"Then we should pray that Robert does not die."
"Small chance of that," said Renly.
"Sometimes the gods are merciful."
"The Lannisters are not." Lord Renly turned away and went back across the moat, to the tower where his brother lay dying.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"He was old, yes, but a good man still. I hope he has not come to harm. The Lannisters are great fools." They climbed a few more steps. "On the night of Robert's death, I offered your husband a hundred swords and urged him to take Joffrey into his power. Had he listened, he would be regent today, and there would have been no need for me to claim the throne."
"Ned refused you." She did not have to be told.
"He had sworn to protect Robert's children," Renly said. "I lacked the strength to act alone, so when Lord Eddard turned me away, I had no choice but to flee. Had I stayed, I knew the queen would see to it that I did not long outlive my brother."
-------------------
His meddling had forced her (Cersei) to rid herself of Robert sooner than she would have liked, before she could deal with his pestilential brothers.
 
He tries two different ways to force Cersei out before she kills him that don't involve increase to his power or becoming king and then finally declares himself king because it's the best way to protect himself from Cersei and the Lannisters. Joff hates him too.
 
And for military tactics, but letting his opponents batter each other down and making them easier to fight seems like decent strategy to me (and classic tenets of war). If you speak of SE, well I can see the small elements he gives up from a tactics standpoint (fighting into the sunlight, not waiting for infantry, et al) but occasionally smashing something with a large hammer is useful from an strategic and political standpoint. Personally I would have sent Tarly or someone to relieve SE while I continued my march to KL but, minus a shadow baby which was heretofore unknown in Westeros, the plan was going to work. Stannis had neither the defensive positioning nor the fortifications to withstand a force 4x - 5x times bigger and better armed and armored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/14/2018 at 10:37 AM, Light a wight tonight said:

A smith has more to do than forge weapons. 

Copper is the major component in bronze, one of the more useful materials then and now. Iron may be soft for weapons but it has a lot of other uses. A smith should know that, and certainly not conflate cast iron with iron in its more malleable form.

This is just one more of GRRM's slips, like calling a bird a hawk and a falcon in the same paragraph.

Absolutely! Smiths have other tasks as well, but Noye was the castlesmith of Storms End. A castlesmith is a specific profession which is responsible for the weapons and armor of his lord and his men-at-arms.

And as for copper, yes it is a main component in bronze. But let's see the main uses of bronze in medieval times: coin, and mint; Mirrors; Sculptures. These are pretty specific uses, of which I believe none are one of Noye's tasks. 

Brass bronze (copper and zinc) is often used as a decorative metal. Funts and fountains used by churches use brass, and exquisite pitchers. While I concur that it adds to the monetary value of the metal, it still has little value to a weaponsmith as Donal Noye. 

Sorry for the delayed answer btw, been busy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/9/2018 at 8:16 PM, Ascension of the Metatron said:

They let their own personal ambition tear the kingdom apart.  All of them can be blamed but let me pick on Robb to use an example.  Robb rebelled against his king because he felt Dad got the shaft.  That's not a good reason to march an army south just to protect one Stark.  Robb should have crawled to King's Landing to make peace with his king even if it meant risking his life and his family.  I will grant that it is easy for me to say this because I don't care for the Starks.  The life of the Starks is not worth going to war over.   

It was partly to defend the Tullys against the Lannister raiders but Cat was partly to blame for that.  Cat risked war to get justice for her son, Tywin started a war to get his son back.  I don't even think Tywin cared at all about Tyrion's guilt.  He would have done it even if Tyrion killed all of the Stark children.  Two sons is not worth the number of lives it costs but that's how they think.  It's stupidity but they all do that.  Going years back to Brandon and Lyanna.  Brandon would behave as he did partly to save face even if Lyanna had gone along willingly with who he thinks she did, in this case he thinks Rhaegar.  It's a really bad philosophy but it is the result of being too proud.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2018 at 2:07 PM, Universal Sword Donor said:

He tries two different ways to force Cersei out before she kills him that don't involve increase to his power or becoming king and then finally declares himself king because it's the best way to protect himself from Cersei and the Lannisters. Joff hates him too.

He's explicitly trying to force Cersei out so that Margaery and the Tyrells can take over all that patronage the Lannisters have been getting, with Renly increasing his own power as their patron at court.

And if he wanted to protect himself from the Lannisters, he would submit to Stannis (who has no reason to hate him, and makes him a generous offer of being the heir, for a man with no heirs who can inherit at the moment), and join their forces.

If it were Renly vs the Lannisters, it would be one thing.  But he has literally no legal case to be king while Stannis lives, and he can get the exact same personal protection (perhaps more) by submitting to Stannis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

He's explicitly trying to force Cersei out so that Margaery and the Tyrells can take over all that patronage the Lannisters have been getting, with Renly increasing his own power as their patron at court.

He is aware that Cersei wants rid of him, something he tells Ned, so him wanting rid of Cersei is not just about making Mace Tyrell more powerful but there is also self preservation involved. 

11 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

And if he wanted to protect himself from the Lannisters, he would submit to Stannis (who has no reason to hate him, and makes him a generous offer of being the heir, for a man with no heirs who can inherit at the moment), and join their forces.

But then he'd still be rebelling? If he is going to rebel why not rebel for himself as he knows, unlike his brother Stannis, that he is capable of getting the support needed to win and keep the crown. 

 

11 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

If it were Renly vs the Lannisters, it would be one thing.  But he has literally no legal case to be king while Stannis lives, and he can get the exact same personal protection (perhaps more) by submitting to Stannis.

Worked for Robert while Viserys lived. I really don't think he was worried about legality as once King he can do what he pleases. He was also hoping that Stannis would see sense and support him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

And if he wanted to protect himself from the Lannisters, he would submit to Stannis (who has no reason to hate him, and makes him a generous offer of being the heir, for a man with no heirs who can inherit at the moment), and join their forces.

 

There's always a chance his wife could become or die giving the Stannis the option marry a more fertile bride from a family that didn't cause him to starve for months. The Tyrells supported Renly because they wanted one of their girls to be queen; if Renly can't give them that they're not going to support his treason.

 

27 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

 

If it were Renly vs the Lannisters, it would be one thing.  But he has literally no legal case to be king while Stannis lives, and he can get the exact same personal protection (perhaps more) by submitting to Stannis.

Does Stannis have much more a case? His twincest story reeks of a weak fabrication by a greedy uncle looking to justify stealing his nephew's throne. And Dany comes far before each of her distant Baratheon cousins. And while Viserys was alive he was the legally rightful king .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

He is aware that Cersei wants rid of him, something he tells Ned, so him wanting rid of Cersei is not just about making Mace Tyrell more powerful but there is also self preservation involved. 

As well as wanting to stay in power hench trying to get Margary to replace Cersi-the lanisters have no reason to love Renly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

He's explicitly trying to force Cersei out so that Margaery and the Tyrells can take over all that patronage the Lannisters have been getting, with Renly increasing his own power as their patron at court.

He's not going to get any more power with Robert as king. He can get pretty much anything he wants now. Being besties with the Queen's brother isn't as good as, ya know, being the king's brother.

5 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

And if he wanted to protect himself from the Lannisters, he would submit to Stannis (who has no reason to hate him, and makes him a generous offer of being the heir, for a man with no heirs who can inherit at the moment), and join their forces.

Stannis ran away from the danger without telling anyone his suspicions and left renly and Robert to their own devices. Not only was Stannis not there in KL, he actively refused to respond to anyone including Ned and had actively been raising sellswords and sellsails before Robert had even died. Even if Renly had allied himself with Stannis, either way they get steamrolled. Stannis can barely raise an army and the Stormlands didn't even send their full strength with Renly when he was the prime candidate. If Renly isn't king, he doesn't get the Tyrells.

5 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

If it were Renly vs the Lannisters, it would be one thing.  But he has literally no legal case to be king while Stannis lives, and he can get the exact same personal protection (perhaps more) by submitting to Stannis.

Robert had no legal case either. It was a battle for survival. Overthrowing Joffrey means little and less if Tommen and Myrcella are still alive. Skipping one spot versus skipping four hardly makies it worse. Renly's best chance for survival (and Stannis' too) was to ally himself with the Tyrells. That's what he did. He cannot get the same protection. 100K swords is more than 20K swords, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

He's not going to get any more power with Robert as king. He can get pretty much anything he wants now. Being besties with the Queen's brother isn't as good as, ya know, being the king's brother.

This is, in almost every way, wrong.  Look at it this way; we see throughout Robert's court that the dominating faction are the Lannisters.  Because of Cersei, Lannisters serve in important positions throughout the royal bureaucracy, and have influential places in court.  What Renly wants to do is supplant the Lannisters with the Tyrells, with the obvious implication that any success in gaining patronage, offices, honors, and wealth that the Tyrells achieve, is due to him!  This is a major point for a feudal aristocracy, and moreover, helps Renly's political ambitions, and his prestige and power within the Seven Kingdoms.  Then he is not only Robert's brother, but also the patron of the Queen, and the second most powerful family in the realm.

15 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Even if Renly had allied himself with Stannis, either way they get steamrolled. Stannis can barely raise an army and the Stormlands didn't even send their full strength with Renly when he was the prime candidate. If Renly isn't king, he doesn't get the Tyrells.

I'm not sure why you think this.  If Renly rises for Stannis, the Lannisters are 100% doomed.  The forces of the Reach are irrelevant at this point, because Renly and the Stormlanders + Stannis and the men sworn to Dragonstone are more than enough to storm Kings Landing.  And the Stormlands don't send their full strength because they split their loyalties; if the younger Baratheons unite, they'll follow en masse .

15 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Robert had no legal case either. It was a battle for survival.

I'm not sure where the fandom gets these ridiculous notions.  Probably folks who didn't pay enough attention in grade school.  Look, all of these monarchs are bound by a feudal contract, in which they respect the rights and privileges of their vassals in return for fealty and service.  By breaking that contract, Aerys II effectively de-legitimized himself.  What's shocking isn't that Robert won, but that ANYONE fought for him (outside the Martells, who had personal reasons for it with Elia a hostage).  In that scenario, Robert has an extremely strong legal case, as he is the next closest Targaryen descendant to the Throne outside of Aerys' immediate family.

15 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Overthrowing Joffrey means little and less if Tommen and Myrcella are still alive.

Whew, another case of someone not reasoning beyond the obvious.  It is common knowledge that Robert's kids, aren't his kids.  The entire WOT5K is basically a giant trial by combat to determine who gets the final say regarding their legitimacy.  If the Lannisters win, then they have the monopoly on power which allows them to effectively squash rumors.  If they lose, the opposite is true.

 

15 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Renly's best chance for survival (and Stannis' too) was to ally himself with the Tyrells. That's what he did. He cannot get the same protection. 100K swords is more than 20K swords, no?

Right, but what Renly should do, if he wasn't a stupid little shit out to undermine the entirety of the Westerosi social order, was ally with the Tyrells like he does during Robert's reign, and then bring them over to Stannis' camp.

Look, it is self-evident that Renly's personal safety was not actually threatened, at any point, because he could have bent the knee to Joffrey and been confirmed as Lord of Storm's End; there is even an argument to be made tha Stannis would accept such an argument, even if he won (if his own conflicting feelings about Robert's Rebellion are any indication, that is).  He is only in danger because he wants to advance politically.  He has no legal claim to the throne and no legitimate claim to needing the protecting of the Tyrells; he sits in one of the most impregnable castles in the world, with tens of thousands of swords to call on - he's in no danger, physically or politically, with the ONE exception of if he wants to make himself king.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Does Stannis have much more a case? His twincest story reeks of a weak fabrication by a greedy uncle looking to justify stealing his nephew's throne. And Dany comes far before each of her distant Baratheon cousins. And while Viserys was alive he was the legally rightful king .

Dany has been disinherited, because Aerys' entire line was disinherited in Robert's Rebellion.  Your idea of "legality" is way too rigid in this context; we have tons of examples of "legal" heirs being disinherited in the Targaryen era alone.

And most of the realm, or at least the political elite, seems to tacitly agree that there is at least reasonable doubt as to Joffrey's legitimacy.  That we know it to be true matters, though.  Stannis is right, and is pursuing his legal claim.  That being said, even HE, the arch-legalist, admits that he wouldn't blame men for supporting Joffrey.  Renly has no such argument behind him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:
17 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

 

I'm not sure where the fandom gets these ridiculous notions.  Probably folks who didn't pay enough attention in grade school.  Look, all of these monarchs are bound by a feudal contract, in which they respect the rights and privileges of their vassals in return for fealty and service.  By breaking that contract, Aerys II effectively de-legitimized himself.  What's shocking isn't that Robert won, but that ANYONE fought for him (outside the Martells, who had personal reasons for it with Elia a hostage).  In that scenario, Robert has an extremely strong legal case, as he is the next closest Targaryen descendant to the Throne outside of Aerys' immediate family.

Eh, was Robert's rebellion just? Certianly. Is his case for why he should be king strong? Not really while two full blooded trueborn Targaryians are alive. By law of succession the crown should go to Viserys, then to Dany or Dany's sons. Robert cannot disinherit any body. Them(the rebels) removing Aerys from power does not mean he(Robert), a subject having won his rebellion and legitimizing himself using his Targaryian anchestery has a better claim than actual Targaryians.  Even when overthrowing a king(such is the case was with Maegor the cruel, or Aegon IV), the people who actually did it put the crown on the next in line and tried working with them.

People fought for Aerys for he was king and thought it was was in their self-interest to not risk his ire should he win.

 

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

se of someone not reasoning beyond the obvious.  It is common knowledge that Robert's kids, aren't his kids

No it isn't. Most of the people who truly  believe that have mostly been shown to be his followers. Because, he's offering no proof of his claim and him running away to DS without having alerted anyone of the twincest doesn't look good for and his excuse of Robert wouldn't have trusted him only would people think why the hell should they.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

This is, in almost every way, wrong.  Look at it this way; we see throughout Robert's court that the dominating faction are the Lannisters.  Because of Cersei, Lannisters serve in important positions throughout the royal bureaucracy, and have influential places in court.  What Renly wants to do is supplant the Lannisters with the Tyrells, with the obvious implication that any success in gaining patronage, offices, honors, and wealth that the Tyrells achieve, is due to him!  This is a major point for a feudal aristocracy, and moreover, helps Renly's political ambitions, and his prestige and power within the Seven Kingdoms.  Then he is not only Robert's brother, but also the patron of the Queen, and the second most powerful family in the realm.

Let's just agree to disagree

Quote

I'm not sure why you think this.  If Renly rises for Stannis, the Lannisters are 100% doomed.  The forces of the Reach are irrelevant at this point, because Renly and the Stormlanders + Stannis and the men sworn to Dragonstone are more than enough to storm Kings Landing.  And the Stormlands don't send their full strength because they split their loyalties; if the younger Baratheons unite, they'll follow en masse .

Renly doesn't know what the hell Stannis is doing. Barely anyone does. Nor does he know his purpose. The forces of the Reach are 100% not irrelevant. Even going by the typical timeline they'd have, what, 25K between the two of them? Tywin is at HH. He can and will still march down and strike them in the rear. And that ignores that Mace is still independent and this point so he can still offer the same Joff/Tommen marriage needed to cement the largest army in the realm.

Quote

I'm not sure where the fandom gets these ridiculous notions.  Probably folks who didn't pay enough attention in grade school.  Look, all of these monarchs are bound by a feudal contract, in which they respect the rights and privileges of their vassals in return for fealty and service.  By breaking that contract, Aerys II effectively de-legitimized himself.  What's shocking isn't that Robert won, but that ANYONE fought for him (outside the Martells, who had personal reasons for it with Elia a hostage).  In that scenario, Robert has an extremely strong legal case, as he is the next closest Targaryen descendant to the Throne outside of Aerys' immediate family.

I'm guessing it's because we paid attention in middle school, high school, college and when we read the books. Aerys had already murdered 10 nobles, including an LP and his heir, for little provocation. I am not talking about Robert claiming the throne but the civil war he fought to stay alive. You might remember Aerys calling for Robert's head for no reason.

But as to your ludicrously sophomoric notion of "strong legal case" inheritance was rarely neat, especially in an era modeled after the War of Roses and when GRRM said it's a messy situation.

Quote

Whew, another case of someone not reasoning beyond the obvious.  It is common knowledge that Robert's kids, aren't his kids.  The entire WOT5K is basically a giant trial by combat to determine who gets the final say regarding their legitimacy.  If the Lannisters win, then they have the monopoly on power which allows them to effectively squash rumors.  If they lose, the opposite is true.

It isn't common knowledge. It's known by a few. Varys, LF, Jon Arryn, Stannis, and Ned knew but that's about it. Even if Renly has heard it, he dismissed it outright. Then you have the facts that: Robert recognized his children, no one can really dispute it with a confession from Jaime/Cersei, and Ned Stark "confessed" that he was rebelling and Joff was Robert's son.

Quote

Right, but what Renly should do, if he wasn't a stupid little shit out to undermine the entirety of the Westerosi social order, was ally with the Tyrells like he does during Robert's reign, and then bring them over to Stannis' camp.

Renly should do exactly what he did. Anything you'd ask him to do is asking him to sew himself in a rock-filled sack.

Quote

Look, it is self-evident that Renly's personal safety was not actually threatened, at any point, because he could have bent the knee to Joffrey and been confirmed as Lord of Storm's End; there is even an argument to be made tha Stannis would accept such an argument, even if he won (if his own conflicting feelings about Robert's Rebellion are any indication, that is).  He is only in danger because he wants to advance politically.  He has no legal claim to the throne and no legitimate claim to needing the protecting of the Tyrells; he sits in one of the most impregnable castles in the world, with tens of thousands of swords to call on - he's in no danger, physically or politically, with the ONE exception of if he wants to make himself king.

1) Cersei confirms thats he was going to kill all the Baratheon brothers

on Arryn put Robert Baratheon in her bed, and before he died he'd begun sniffing about her and Jaime as well. 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

2) Stannis would have accepted Renly being the subordinate, which immediately loses the support of Highgarden.

3) No See point 1

4) Mostly wrong and completely refuted

5) Will all the swords of the SL come to defend Renly when he's denounced as a traitor and the armies of Westeros come for him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Dany has been disinherited, because Aerys' entire line was disinherited in Robert's Rebellion.  Your idea of "legality" is way too rigid in this context; we have tons of examples of "legal" heirs being disinherited in the Targaryen era alone.

And most of the realm, or at least the political elite, seems to tacitly agree that there is at least reasonable doubt as to Joffrey's legitimacy.  That we know it to be true matters, though.  Stannis is right, and is pursuing his legal claim.  That being said, even HE, the arch-legalist, admits that he wouldn't blame men for supporting Joffrey.  Renly has no such argument behind him.

Please make a partial list of who. You can separate it into "People who know", "People who verbally or POV suspect" and "Everyone else." Please strike through anyone whose thoughts come AFTER Stannis' suspicion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/14/2018 at 7:05 PM, Knight of the Winged Pig said:

Let's try and put them in a list, from the best to the worst:

1) Stannis. Meritocratic (Davos being elevated to Handship), Just (his decision not to attack Claw Isle, the indictment of Alester Florent, etc.), radical ("we shall make new lords"), aware of the mechanisms of human nature ("Good men and true will fight for Joffrey"), not affected by prejudice (Flea Bottom and Stony Shore smallfolk in his armies, Essosi in his navy), military prodigy (Castle Black, Deepwood Motte, the Siege of Storm's End, Fair Isle, capture of Dragonstone), good in diplomacy (winning the mountain clans, restoring the Motte to House Glover), open-minded when it comes to religion ("it was only wood we burned", "I will have no burnings. Pray harder"), hearing opposite views between his advisors and trying to steer the best course (hearing both Davos and Melisandre vis-a-vis Edric Storm), anti-corruption ("I mean to scour that court clean") and genuinely fighting for the realm, which makes him a righteous man (GRRM's own words).

 

1. Stannis engages in more nepotistic appointments out of all the kings besides Joffrey with his appointment of Florents to be his Hand, Castellan, and Lord Admiral.  One could even argue that Davos's appoint was strongly nepotistic seeing how he is Stannis's only friend.  Stannis's burning of Alester Florent was hardly just and the strategy of attacking Claw Isle was a stupid one even ignoring the issue of it being just or not.  Stannis wanting to kill a bunch of lords and replace them is hardly a positive.  Stannis hardly has some great insight into the mechanisms of human nature.  Smallfolk fight in all of the different kings' forces and only uses Essosis because he needs them.  Stannis isn't good at diplomacy at all there is a reason barely anyone follows him.  He only gets the Mountain Clans because of Jon.  Burning Godswoods and Septs isn't open minded.  Refusing to burn people alive as religious sacrifices hardly makes one open minded.  Stannis is more than willing to ignore opposing views when he disagrees for example Cressen.  Stannis has plenty of corruption in his own court with Mel and the Florents.

 

Quote

5) Renly. For all his so-called "popularity", in the Stormlands (where he was feudal lord) he had the support of only the Carons, Errols, Estermonts, Conningtons, Penroses and Morrigens, plus Brienne, meaning that only 6 of the 35 Houses joined him. In the Reach, he gained his allies due to his marriage to Margaery, which means that Mace, not Renly, had to mobilize the Tarlys, Rowans, etc. Outside those regions, his base of support was nonexistent. Furthermore, he had no rightful claim (hence he resorts to the "you may have the better claim, but I have the bigger army" quip), he knew about the incest but did not tell Robert, because he wanted the truth to be revealed just in time when Robert would already have been attracted to Margaery (hence the scene where he shows Eddard the locket), he actively instructed his men to kill Stannis ("see no insult is done to my brother's corpse") and dismisses the idea of a Great Council ("do direwolves vote"). He is not a proto-democrat, but rather espouses the "Might makes Right" doctrine, is- at least- an attempted kinslayer and does not have a grasp of either feudal politics or military strategy and tactics.

Renly had more support then just those six houses (also all of Tarth was with him.)  The fact that a House isn't mentioned by name by Renly or Catelyn hardly means they didn't support him.  Instead, seeing how Stannis makes such a big stink of how all of the Stormlands support Renly over him one can easily assume that any later Stormlord mentioned in Stannis's camp following Renly's death was initially with Renly.  Especially, seeing the only mention of new lords going over to Stannis was those from Renly's camp following Renly's death.  Both Tarly and Rowan are mentioned as people that loved Renly best.  Furthermore, unless they approved of Renly is unlikely the Reach lords would rebel for him even if the Tyrells went along with him.  Nope, Renly didn't know of the incest nor did he even believe it after Stannis told him.  Meanwhile, Stannis actually had Renly killed.  Why would he support a Great Council when the odds were on his side? Nor was it like Stannis was calling for one either.

He has a better understanding of feudal politics out of all the kings.  While, Stannis believes in Sansa's fairy tales where everyone should follow him because he said so or Robb's belief of putting honor above everything else or Joffrey's insanity.  Renly understood that power exists where man places it and had so the most men put it behind him.  Furthermore, his military strategy of starving KL was praised as exactly what Tyrion would have done in his place.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Minsc said:

1. Stannis engages in more nepotistic appointments out of all the kings besides Joffrey with his appointment of Florents to be his Hand, Castellan, and Lord Admiral.  One could even argue that Davos's appoint was strongly nepotistic seeing how he is Stannis's only friend.  Stannis's burning of Alester Florent was hardly just and the strategy of attacking Claw Isle was a stupid one even ignoring the issue of it being just or not.  Stannis wanting to kill a bunch of lords and replace them is hardly a positive.  Stannis hardly has some great insight into the mechanisms of human nature.  Smallfolk fight in all of the different kings' forces and only uses Essosis because he needs them.  Stannis isn't good at diplomacy at all there is a reason barely anyone follows him.  He only gets the Mountain Clans because of Jon.  Burning Godswoods and Septs isn't open minded.  Refusing to burn people alive as religious sacrifices hardly makes one open minded.  Stannis is more than willing to ignore opposing views when he disagrees for example Cressen.  Stannis has plenty of corruption in his

Oh he also seriously considered murderkng his 10 year old nephew for political gain and plans on murdering the kids born out of the twincest for being abominations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Oh he also seriously considered murderkng his 10 year old nephew for political gain and plans on murdering the kids born out of the twincest for being abominations.

Abominations and threats to his potential kingship. But yes he hated him some incest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Abominations and threats to his potential kingship. But yes he hated him some incest

Of course-but if he was a legal paragon he wouldn't dare consider murdering children for no other crime than being born and maybe posing a threat to him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooooo are we having the argument that Renly should put off his crown (and Margaery's) and tell all the lords of the Reach and Stormlands that despite them rising in rebellion for him that Stannis is now king and you have to fight for him because he came out of nowhere and said Bob's kids aren't Bob's kids, AKA political suicide. 

If Stannis wanted Renly's support he should have come to him before Robert was murdered or if not right after Robert was murdered not sit around on his island hoarding the oh so convenient knowledge that just so happens to make him the rightful king. Seriously, his brother is known to be working against the Lannister faction at court and is the Lord of Storm's End besides why would he not try and involve him or win him to his side? What if Renly had simply sworn fealty to Joffrey as Robert's heir and raised his armies in his defence if anything Stannis is lucky that Renly raised an army at all because without it Stannis wouldn't have made much headway.

Without Robert's protection or Ned's support in controlling Joffrey Renly crowning himself king was the most assured way he could both protect his own life and power, once Renly was crowned king there was no going back, he's already usurping his nephews and niece comparatively jumping over Stannis should barely even matter and certainly isn't something to trash your alliances for as Stannis' claims are dubious at best and at the time Renly claimed the throne Stannis hadn't declared his intentions and wasn't even an option.  

As soon as Robert died the the die was cast. 

Also Stannis murdering his nephews and claiming the throne would likely be looked upon in history as just that because he wasn't a particularly likeable fellow anyway, he'll be the classic jealous evil uncle a few years down the line. If anyone has a chance of spinning usurping Joffrey in a good way it's Renly. 

As always I say that if people are arguing that Renly should have done his duty and not put his personal interests first then people should be arguing that he should support Joffrey and not Stannis. Supporting Stannis was never a practical possibility because Stannis didn't try and get Renly's support when it mattered, he did it when it was too late. Thinking Renly's an opportunistic arsehole is fair enough, whatever float's your boat but it's a leap to suggest that he should just support Stannis instead like nah don't commit treason for yourself but do it for your brother you don't even like on this flimsy premise of royal bastards when you're already crowned with a huge army in the field, these discussions are always so Stannis-centric and it makes me look like the biggest Renly fanboy. 

EDIT: And here's where I cowardly remove myself from the board for a month to avoid going down the people that don't really care much about Renly but don't think he's the devil vs Stannis fans infinite loop rabbit hole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×