Varysblackfyre321 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 2 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said: Right because when the Freys suspected him of murdering their men or BW, everyone believed the Freys and Manderly was crushed. And before you say he was crushed, he wasn't attacked for the suspected murders. He was attacked for mocking the dead boy and the Boltons stopped the fighting. I'm sorry what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Universal Sword Donor Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 3 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: I'm sorry what? scroll up? Or back? There's a pretty clear straightforward conversation we were having. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said: scroll up? Or back? There's a pretty clear straightforward conversation we were having. I'm just trying to understand your argument: you think Manderly has shown to be merciful towards the freys by not trying to kill them (yet) at Winterfell or at least pick off some members? But you also think the Frey and Manderly's soldiers brawl over Manderly's comments over little Walder's murder shows them both being crushed to everyone (how)? And you don't see what he did to fat Walda and his comments on little Walder sufficient proof he really doesn't discriminate against the Freys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Universal Sword Donor Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: I'm just trying to understand your argument: you think Manderly has shown to be merciful towards the freys by not trying to kill them (yet) at Winterfell or at least pick off some members? But you also think the Frey and Manderly's soldiers brawl over Manderly's comments over little Walder's murder shows them both being crushed to everyone (how)? And you don't see what he did to fat Walda and his comments on little Walder sufficient proof he really doesn't discriminate against the Freys? No. I don't know how to make this more clear: Wyman is far from innocent. However the scope of his actions, the specificity of his targets, and the lack of eminently plausible, aggressive action against "innocent" Freys put him leagues above Walder Frey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kandrax Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 2 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: And you don't see what he did to fat Walda and his comments on little Walder sufficient proof he really doesn't discriminate against the Freys? 1. He also served pies to his fellow norhmen. 2. I doubt that he will say such things if victim was some little girl of House Frey, who had been raped to death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 7 minutes ago, Kandrax said: 1. He also served pies to his fellow norhmen. 2. I doubt that he will say such things if victim was some little girl of House Frey, who had been raped to death. 1.) ok??? 2.) Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Mac Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 7 hours ago, Blackfish Tully said: How much of Littlefinger's plans and thought process have we really been in on ? That is why I did specify in my post "from what we have seen". His actions and demeanour since Cat's death in ASOS, AFFC and TWOW sample chapters do not seem like the actions of someone who is heartbroken or even that concerned with her passing. He has shown zero inclination in controlling the Riverlands, accepting the Crown's decision to appoint whoever they want to rule Harrenhal (and as a result the Riverlands itself) while we have seen him concerned with what the other Vale lords do with their resources and we have seen him actively courting and bribing a great deal of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said: No. I don't know how to make this more clear: Wyman is far from innocent. However the scope of his actions, the specificity of his targets, and the lack of eminently plausible, aggressive action against "innocent" Freys put him leagues above Walder Frey. If he could kill them all he would. And it's clear he wants to. He would feed a pregnant woman her dead kin and laugh at boy who'd been murdered because they were Freys. He isnt "leagues" ahead of Walder because at the present moment he hasn't been able to commit the mass slaughter against his family's enemies (from their lords to their children)z In my mind, this makes him not really better than Walder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Universal Sword Donor Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 58 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: If he could kill them all he would. And it's clear he wants to. He would feed a pregnant woman her dead kin and laugh at boy who'd been murdered because they were Freys. He clearly has the means and opportunity: “We must look at Manderly,” muttered Ser Aenys Frey. “Lord Wyman loves us not.” Ryswell was not convinced. “He loves his steaks and chops and meat pies, though. Prowling the castle by dark would require him to leave the table. The only time he does that is when he seeks the privy for one of his hourlong squats.”“I do not claim Lord Wyman does the deeds himself. He brought three hundred men with him. A hundred knights. Any of them might have—” Yet he still hasn't murdered innocent Frey peasants or men-at-arms. As far as we know he didn't murder BW either. Now feeding a pregnant women her dead kin or mocking a dead boy as being worse than, ya know, murdering Freys in cold blood (which he does) or massacring over 3500 people enjoying one's hospitality under the guise of a wedding alliance (Walder) is a hot and fresh take. 58 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: He isnt "leagues" ahead of Walder because at the present moment he hasn't been able to commit the mass slaughter against his family's enemies (from their lords to their children)z Even though the Freys think he's in a position to do so? 58 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: In my mind, this makes him not really better than Walder. So someone you suspect might do something -- but hasn't and most people in book doubt he could/would -- is no better than someone who did something demonstrably awful, both by book POVs and standard book morals (eg Faith, Old Gods, et al)? So just to clarify, a serial killer or mass murderer is no worse than someone who dreams of committing mass murder but hasn't decided to yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowy Tends Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 5 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: And you don't see what he did to fat Walda 1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: He would feed a pregnant woman her dead kin A noble pregnant women or a private soldier, what difference does it make? The crime lies in making and serving these pies to anyone… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said: He clearly has the means and opportunity: “We must look at Manderly,” muttered Ser Aenys Frey. “Lord Wyman loves us not.” Ryswell was not convinced. “He loves his steaks and chops and meat pies, though. Prowling the castle by dark would require him to leave the table. The only time he does that is when he seeks the privy for one of his hourlong squats.”“I do not claim Lord Wyman does the deeds himself. He brought three hundred men with him. A hundred knights. Any of them might have—” Yet he still hasn't murdered innocent Frey peasants or men-at-arms. As far as we know he didn't murder BW either. Now feeding a pregnant women her dead kin or mocking a dead boy as being worse than, ya know, murdering Freys in cold blood (which he does) or massacring over 3500 people enjoying one's hospitality under the guise of a wedding alliance (Walder) is a hot and fresh take. He has the means and opportunitty to kill some of them. He could kill some before losing his head. He has enough to hurt the freys' and his enemies but not as much he wants; he wants to hurt them the worst way he can; hench the patience.He could not kill all of them at the moment. He is not being merciful as much he's being pragmatic on how he goes about getting his vengeance. He would when he's in a secure position to do so; because he doesn't see the difference; all Freys deserve to die in his mind. He would act no sympathetic when/if given the opportunity to erase the Freys entirely from the earth. He is a monster. 1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said: Even though the Freys think he's in a position to do so? The Freys per your quote only showed they think he was capable to have been responsible for the recent murders that had been happening in Winterfell; not that he with the men he currently has overpower their forces and masssacare them all(as he would like to do). So someone you suspect might do something -- but hasn't and most people in book doubt he could/would -- is no better than someone who did something demonstrably awful, both by book POVs and standard book morals (eg Faith, Old Gods, et al)? First, could? Are you conceding most people doubt he could masssacare the Freys at WF at the moment? And it's not "might" anymore than Ramsey "might" rape an attractive peasant woman he comes across. He would and it's clear the only he hasn't yet is because he can't. And I'm pretty sure tricking people(especially a pregnant woman) into eating their kin would be a demostrable. Are the actions purely equal? No. Biter hasn't killed 3500 people either. He hasn't the means that doesn't make him any moral than a person who does. Robb Stark would be disgusted by the man for what he did. As well I'm pretty sure many other Pov characters. And the faith because what he did was simply a crime against nature. Rickard Karstark surely would approve and if it wasn't happening to the Freys doubtless Lord would give a token of respect for Manderly's actions. Look you think Manderly is leagues better than old Frey; I just don't see it that way. Ted bundy isn't really a more moral character than hitler of virtue having not killed as many people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Universal Sword Donor Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 7 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: He has the means and opportunitty to kill some of them. He could kill some before losing his head. Yes... 7 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: He has enough to hurt the freys' and his enemies peasants; but enough; he wants to hurt them the worst way he can; hench the patience..He could not kill all of them at the moment. He is not being merciful as much he's being pragmatic on how he goes about getting his vengeance. He would when he's in a secure position to do so; because he doesn't see the difference; all Freys deserve to die in his mind. Where has he said he wants to kill them all? He certainly indicates he wants to kill those responsible for the Red Wedding and does kill three male Freys. Note that the innocent Frey peasants and men-at-arms might not even have been there. 7 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: The Freys per your quote only showed they think he was capable to have been responsible for the murders that had been happening in Winterfell; not that he with the men he currently has overpower their forces and masssacare them all(as he would like to do). Yes meaning he can kill them piecemeal. 7 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: So someone you suspect might do something -- but hasn't and most people in book doubt he could/would -- is no better than someone who did something demonstrably awful, both by book POVs and standard book morals (eg Faith, Old Gods, et al)? First, could? Are you conceding most people doubt he could masssacare the Freys at WF at the moment? And it's not "might" anymore than Ramsey "might" rape an attractive peasant woman he comes across. He would. And I'm pretty sure tricking people(especially a pregnant woman) into eating their kin would be a demostrable. Are the actions purely equal? No. Biter hasn't killed 3500 people either. He hasn't the means that doesn't make him any moral than a person who does. Most people doubt he could massacre all the Freys. Well yes but that was never my point. My point is he could kills some or many of the Freys pretty much at will because someone is already doing it, but hasn't acted. Yet despite the actions not being equal, you say: In my mind, this makes him not really better than Walder. So his actions are not as bad as Walder but he's just as bad as Walder? He's definitely not a saint and tricking people into cannibalism after murdering their family is not worthy of sainthood. It's a sight different in terms of scope, adherence to tradition, and treachery though. Murdering your "king" and 3500+ guests under the guise of a party IS worse than killing 3 men, who weren't guests, and feeding them to a few hundred (?) people, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 42 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said: Yes Glad you concede he has neither has the means or opportunity to kill all the Freys. Now we can move on. 42 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said: Where has he said he wants to kill them all? He certainly indicates he wants to kill those responsible for the Red Wedding and does kill three male Freys. Note that the innocent Frey peasants and men-at-arms might not even have been there. He literally thinks a 8 year old boy is murdered because he wont grow up to be a Frey. He got off on watching fat Walda consume as much as he did her relatives. If he ever had a chance to kill all the Freys clearly he would; based off these two things it's clear he does not discriminate when it comes to Freys; they all deserve to die. 42 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said: Most people doubt he could massacre all the Freys. Well yes but that was never my point. My point is he could kills some or many of the Freys pretty much at will because someone is already doing it, but hasn't acted. Because he's patient. Because he's not an idiot. Not for any moral reason he's simply bidding the time for the best time to strike. To hurt them the best he can. 42 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said: Yet despite the actions not being equal, you say: In my mind, this makes him not really better than Walder. So his actions are not as bad as Walder but he's just as bad as Walder? He's definitely not a saint and tricking people into cannibalism after murdering their family is not worthy of sainthood. It's a sight different in terms of scope, adherence to tradition, and treachery though. Murdering your "king" and 3500+ guests under the guise of a party IS worse than killing 3 men, who weren't guests, and feeding them to a few hundred (?) people, right? So he hadn't the ability to commit the mass slaughter wants therefore he's a better person who did? Even though it's clear the only thing keeping him from doing so is literally the lack of being able to? Again Biter hasn't the opportunity either;. I'm not going to pretend he's somehow less of a monster by virtue of having not the opportunity to do something he clearly would. Manderly would massacre the Freys if he could. He would kill the women and children not just the men if he had the opportunity and he'd make it horrific as he can think; he hasn't done that yet because he can't. Lord Frey was able to do the Red wedding; he wanted to so he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Universal Sword Donor Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 59 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: Glad you concede he has neither has the means or opportunity to kill all the Freys. Now we can move on. I never even said that, so I'm glad we moved past the mountain you constructed. Quote He literally thinks a 8 year old boy is murdered because he wont grow up to be a Frey. He got off on watching fat Walda consume as much as he did her relatives. If he ever had a chance to kill all the Freys clearly he would; based off these two things it's clear he does not discriminate when it comes to Freys; they all deserve to die. Well that would be your opinion. Do you have anything to actually back that up since he can clearly get away with killing *some* Freys if he wanted to? He might well kill all RW Freys, all Freys, or just some Freys, we lack the ability to discern the end-goal from nothing. Quote Because he's patient. Because he's not an idiot. Not for any moral reason he's simply bidding the time for the best time to strike. To hurt them the best he can. Him being patient and not an idiot doesn't mean he can't take out Freys with impunity. A random person and/or the spearwives and/or LW took out Freys with no apparent consequence. Surely if he were sooo bloodthirsty to kill *all* Freys, he wouldn't turn down a chance to kill one or two with impunity. Quote So he hadn't the ability to commit the mass slaughter wants therefore he's a better person who did? Well by default yes. He hasn't committed mass murder. That's kind of how morality and legal systems work. Quote Even though it's clear the only thing keeping him from doing so is literally the lack of being able to? Clear to you. Not clear to me or expressed anywhere in the book. Quote Again Biter hasn't the opportunity either;. I'm not going to pretend he's somehow less of a monster by virtue of having not the opportunity to do something he clearly would. Biter is an absolute inhuman piece of shit. He's killed dozens, for sure, and probably far more than that and raped even more. He's not worse than Walder Frey. Quote Manderly would massacre the Freys if he could. He would kill the women and children not just the men if he had the opportunity and he'd make it horrific as he can think; he hasn't done that yet because he can't. You have no idea if he would massacre the men and women. To date, he's done neither with ample opportunity and no consequences stemming from the murders. We just know he killed three adult male Freys who mocked his son's death in the same way he mocked LW's death, after they had left his protection and rode guests gifts given by him. Quote Lord Frey was able to do the Red wedding; he wanted to so he did. Yes and that makes him a worse person than Wyman Manderly by literally any metric, classic, modern or in-world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Mac Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 7 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said: Biter is an absolute inhuman piece of shit. He's killed dozens, for sure, and probably far more than that and raped even more. He's not worse than Walder Frey. Really? I guess all our opinions are subjective but I can't really agree with this. Biter is worse than Walder Frey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Universal Sword Donor Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 1 minute ago, Bernie Mac said: Really? I guess all our opinions are subjective but I can't really agree with this. Biter is worse than Walder Frey. Do you consider thousands of lives more important than hundreds of lives? For a historical context, would you consider Richard I, who massacred 2700 muslim prisoners, worse than a hypothetical Crusader who helped sacked Antioch or Jerusalem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said: I never even said that, so I'm glad we moved past the mountain you constructed. Yes you did lol. Like literaly try to explain how I misunderstood this: 4 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said: 5 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: If he could kill them all he would. And it's clear he wants to. He would feed a pregnant woman her dead kin and laugh at boy who'd been murdered because they were Freys. He clearly has the means and opportunity: Now I'm going to assume you've simply forgot about this; still I would hope you'd awknowlege it. 1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said: Well that would be your opinion. Do you have anything to actually back that up since he can clearly get away with killing *some* Freys if he wanted to? He might well kill all RW Freys, all Freys, or just some Freys, we lack the ability to discern the end-goal from nothing. Yes some he can kill some before he loses his head and likely put his family at risk-he would kill all of them if he could-we know this because he thinks it's a good thing for the world when a 8 year old Frey dies-but he can't so he'll settle on making as many as them(Whether they be innocent or not) suffer for what had happened to his son. 1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said: Him being patient and not an idiot doesn't mean he can't take out Freys with impunity. A random person and/or the spearwives and/or LW took out Freys with no apparent consequence. Surely if he were sooo bloodthirsty to kill *all* Freys, he wouldn't turn down a chance to kill one or two wit If he is patient and not an idiot he won't risk his entire plan over raising suspicions just to kill some Freys that should be dead anyway when Manderly is in the position to strike without the cost of his life and possibly the security of his family. No one took out "Freys" little Walder was the only Frey that has been been murdered thus far at Winterfell; and that resulted in a brawl to which Manderly got his throat slit because the Freys were suspicious of him from the start and they would point to him as the prime culprit. So no he can't likely kill with impunity. And I imagine it'd be a lot harder to get to them (discreetly)when they're surrounded by their men and constantly watched. 1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said: You have no ideae would massacre the men and women. To date, he's done neither with ample opportunity and no consequences stemming from the murders. We just know he killed three adult male Freys who mocked his son's death in the same way he mocked LW's death, after they had left his protection and rode guests gifts given by him No he has not had ample opportunity. He could have tried to kill Freys at winterfell and likely just die; his whole quest for revenge ruined because he was an idiot. Yes I'm sure if in the position to wipe them out suddenly he'd feel some compassion towards the innocent Freys that he didn't feel towards Walda(he delighted in her being tricked into canibalism as much her male kin-he will not pity her anymore when/if he has a chance to cleanse the land of Freys) when she ate her kin or little Walder's murdered corpse because he's a Frey the family that hurt him so this is "Justice" . Even your defense(which I don't buy) has him placing the cupabilty of other Freys actions on all Freys by extension-they just lost a nephew/cousin and by virtue of having been related to the guys who'd made mocked his son's death; because he holds the same contemp for all Freys. The man like Walder and Karstark is so vindictive they think whatever they do for buisness gives them a pass. He's a gross spiteful man. A monster. It is obvious thd reason he hasn't killed them all is because he can't. I just don't see the fact he'd inability to do something he would makes him more moral than a person with the ability to do something and did. Ramsey is by no means more moral than Aegon by virtue of having killed less people than him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Mac Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said: Do you consider thousands of lives more important than hundreds of lives? No. I would say Walder's act is far worse than anything Biter has done, but I would not say that makes Walder a worse person, just a person whose actions, due to his position, carries more weight than a commoner like Biter. For me personally, and I realise you are correct as this is a subjective matter and I'm not really trying to change your opinion just explain my own, I say motive and consistency come into it and Biter's motives to his victims or potential victims is worse than Walder's and Biter, as much as we know about him, has been a consistent murderer and rapist while the ancient Walder, up until the Red Wedding, biggest crime was being late for a battle. 1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said: For a historical context, would you consider Richard I, who massacred 2700 muslim prisoners, worse than a hypothetical Crusader who helped sacked Antioch or Jerusalem? I'd have to know the crusader and what the crusader had done and what he was willing to do but saying that he'd have to be pretty bad to be worse than the King who could not be bothered to learn his subject's language. Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kandrax Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 6 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said: Yet he still hasn't murdered innocent Frey peasants or men-at-arms. As far as we know he didn't murder BW Goddamned! It is LW not BW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kandrax Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 8 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: 2.) Why? Because, i don't believe that he would be ok with child molestation, even if victim was Frey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.2f8ac830fe1925cfa7cdb55c61c273c6.png)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.