How exactly did Lysa Tully prevent Vale Lords from mobilizing and joining?

[Geddus]

12 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Except its not really plot armour as the author is clear that the Vale lords would be split in their alliances, their would  have been civil war in the Vale rather than the entire realm support Robb.

Oh I agree, that was just my interpretation of what the post meant.

But I think the extreme luck that favored the Lannisters in the beginning can be generally qualified as plot armour; they paid for it later, however.

[Bernie Mac]

32 minutes ago, Geddus said:

Oh I agree, that was just my interpretation of what the post meant.

But I think the extreme luck that favored the Lannisters in the beginning can be generally qualified as plot armour; they paid for it later, however.

Well not quite. Tywin's in the Riverlands with only two, possibly three realms to worry about when all of a sudden the Reach and Stormlands decide to rebel and his idiot grandson executes a man who could bring peace with the North and Walder Frey acts out of character and joins a rebellion he can't really win and Jaime is caught by surprise. A bit later Robb finds a secret pathway into the Westerlands thanks to his magical pet. 

From Tywin's perspective all the luck was against him, at the start of the series he was chilling in semi retirement from politicking in the realm only occasionally getting involved to look out for his nephews  and could relax knowing one day a grandson would be king. Jamie & Cersei did not only screw over House Baratheon but House Lannister as well.   

[Geddus]

Yes, there's no doubt that Jaime and Cersei screwed their own House, with the sister being the bigger offender.

I was talking about plot armor because the Lannisters (initially) managed to win in a situation that was stacked against them, and much of it was out of "luck" (Cersei betting everything on a boar, Ned's sudden and inexplicable naivety, things like that).

[Bernie Mac]

38 minutes ago, Geddus said:

Yes, there's no doubt that Jaime and Cersei screwed their own House, with the sister being the bigger offender.

Surely they are equal? 

I get Jaime is the more popular character, but they are pretty equal in blame.

38 minutes ago, Geddus said:

I was talking about plot armor because the Lannisters (initially) managed to win in a situation that was stacked against them,

They also managed to get in a position where the majority of the realm were rebelling. Not a common occurrence or something Tywin could have predicted at the start of the book. 

 

[cpg2016]

18 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

A little, perhaps, but the timing of Stannis' revelation are very suspect. Waiting a few months after the kings death to announce that his children are bastards and that he was the real king is not exactly that believable. 

And yet Royce's son does not go to join Robb but Renly. GRRM is correct (it is his universe after all) the Vale would have been divided. By staying neutral Lysa prevented a Vale civil war. 

 

IDK, Stannis' letter seems to gain some traction.  At the very least, it's another weapon for the anti-Lannister faction to wield.

And yes, Robar Royce joins Renly.  This makes perfect sense and doesn't at all invalidate the idea that the Vale is likely to split heavily in Robb's favor.  Robar is a second son, without any lands or titles to inherit.  From a personal perspective, service with Renly makes a ton of sense; he gets an honorable position, and because Renly is trying to upset the status quo, the chance for a lordship and a rich fief.  From a family standpoint, it also makes sense to have a foot in a couple different camps; the House itself can be pro-Robb, while younger sons can serve elsewhere in case shit goes south.

And Lysa does not do a very good job at preventing civil war.  Upon her death, the Lords Declarant immediately take up arms against her husband, and it's not hard to read between the lines and see that there is more to this than just Littlefinger's accession to the position of Robert's regent.

There is a big difference between "the Vale will side with Robb" and "every inhabitant of the Vale will side with Robb".  Obviously there are tons of local political factors, personality issues, and all that, which will cause some fragmentation.  But between Ned's fostering there/relation with Jon Arryn, and Bronze Yohn's vocal support of the Stark cause, and what should be Robert Arryn being a cousin of Robb and nephew of Edmure, there should be a major impetus to support Robb and his Kingdom of the North and Riverlands which has no real counterweight in the Vale.  I'm not arguing that every single political actor breaks that way, but if even half the Vale is enthusiastically supporting Robb, especially when that includes the two foremost families, momentum becomes a powerful factor.

[Geddus]

6 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Surely they are equal? 

I get Jaime is the more popular character, but they are pretty equal in blame.

Cersei iss the queen, later queen regent: she has (or had) more power so she's able to screw up way more. It was also her decision to not give Robert any heirs that started the whole mess, one single black haired child would have prevented everything.

As for the Lannisters, the situation they were in was in part their fault, either directly (Robb and Stannis rebelling) or indirectly (Renly) and the way they came out of it was in no small part due to luck, so the accusation of plot armor doesn't come out of nowhere.

[Bernie Mac]

On 10/5/2018 at 4:19 PM, Geddus said:

Cersei iss the queen, later queen regent: she has (or had) more power so she's able to screw up way more. It was also her decision to not give Robert any heirs that started the whole mess, one single black haired child would have prevented everything.

She was only the Queen regent after all three bastards were born so that is a ridiculous excuse to give for blaming her more than Jaime. They were both equal, he as a KG was just as guilty of betraying the King as she was. 

I understand that the fandom, for good reason,  loathes Cersei and loves Jaime but in regards to cuckolding the king they are equally guilty. 

On 10/5/2018 at 4:19 PM, Geddus said:

As for the Lannisters, the situation they were in was in part their fault, either directly (Robb and Stannis rebelling) or indirectly (Renly) and the way they came out of it was in no small part due to luck, so the accusation of plot armor doesn't come out of nowhere.

It comes out of sour grapes. The Starks literally find magical pets to help them at the start of the series yet no one is calling that plot armor. 

What has became apparent from this topic though is that multiple people don't know what plot armor means. 

House Lannister, like all the Houses, have both good luck and bad luck. 

 

On 10/5/2018 at 4:15 PM, cpg2016 said:

IDK, Stannis' letter seems to gain some traction.  At the very least, it's another weapon for the anti-Lannister faction to wield.

Not really. Who changes sides and declares Stannis king because of the letter? Who switches sides because of the letter?

Stannis releases the letter at the start of ACOK and by the end of the book the people calling Joffrey King has, at the very least, doubled.  

On 10/5/2018 at 4:15 PM, cpg2016 said:

And yes, Robar Royce joins Renly.  This makes perfect sense and doesn't at all invalidate the idea that the Vale is likely to split heavily in Robb's favor.

The authors own words indicates that is not true, I'm going to go with him on this one. No amount of pontificating from you is going to overrule him on this one, sorry. 

On 10/5/2018 at 4:15 PM, cpg2016 said:

 

And Lysa does not do a very good job at preventing civil war. 

She, in fact, does an amazing job. There is zero civil war in the Vale while she lives. Job accomplished. 

 

[Maia]

While I think that it is reasonable that Lysa was able to hold back the Vale nobles  - and also think that it is odd to claim "plot armor" for the Lannisters, when Cat and the Blackfish informed Robb in advance that she wouldn't support him, and given all the help and reputation boosts that Greywind gave him and also how he managed to practically teleport his troops south, when in reality it should have taken him many months to assemble them and march them south..., etc, etc., I do think that it is not entirely believeable that hedge knights, younger sons and collateral relatives of nobles, bastards of nobles and other militarily experienced people didn't join both sides of the conflict, looking for plunder and reputation. It should have been more like things were during the first Blackfyre Rebellion.

 

[Geddus]

On 10/8/2018 at 4:09 PM, Bernie Mac said:

She was only the Queen regent after all three bastards were born so that is a ridiculous excuse to give for blaming her more than Jaime. They were both equal, he as a KG was just as guilty of betraying the King as she was. 

I understand that the fandom, for good reason,  loathes Cersei and loves Jaime but in regards to cuckolding the king they are equally guilty. 

It comes out of sour grapes. The Starks literally find magical pets to help them at the start of the series yet no one is calling that plot armor. 

What has became apparent from this topic though is that multiple people don't know what plot armor means. 

We weren't talking about betraying the King now, were we? We were talking about bringing ruin to the Lannisters and I'm pretty sure you know that.

I understand perfectly well what plot armor is and yes, the Lannisters had plenty of it at the beginning. They're not the only ones, Littlefinger is the most egregious example.

[Bernie Mac]

24 minutes ago, Geddus said:

We weren't talking about betraying the King now, were we? We were talking about bringing ruin to the Lannisters and I'm pretty sure you know that.

Well first of all the Lannisters are nowhere close to ruin, so making up dumb arguments is not really doing you any favors. There is zero danger of them losing the West, in fact their position there is still stronger than it was during Tytos' rule. 

Secondly Jaime is equally at fault, he, along with Cersei, cuckolded the king, he pushed Bran off the tower, injured Ned preventing from being captured and exchanged and idiotically ignored the disappearance of his scouts. allowed the majority of his army to carry on sleeping while he got himself captured and army defeated at Riverrun. 

Jaime's fuck ups were pretty significant. 

24 minutes ago, Geddus said:

I understand perfectly well what plot armor is

Clearly you don't as shown in this very thread. 

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PlotArmor

Please read up on the subject. 

 

24 minutes ago, Geddus said:

 

and yes, the Lannisters had plenty of it at the beginning.

No, they didn't. You seem clueless to what the phrase means. 

List these plenty of examples and why you think they are plot armour and I will happily explain to you how the author has explained it.

24 minutes ago, Geddus said:

 

They're not the only ones, Littlefinger is the most egregious example.

Not really. Again, you seem to not know what the phrase means and rather than look it up are doubling down on your ignorance. 

Littlefinger goes to great lengths to keep himself out of harms way, when he betrays Ned he does so surrounded by Gold Cloaks, when he goes through a warzone he takes hundreds of men to protect him (contrast that with Cat's tiny escort). 

There are clear reasons why he is still alive and its not plot armour. 

[Geddus]

Ooooh but this is awesome, I love thinly veiled insults so much! They make you seem so edgy.

Congratulations on a really great post, you effectively managed to kill any further discussion.

[cpg2016]

On 10/8/2018 at 10:09 AM, Bernie Mac said:

The authors own words indicates that is not true, I'm going to go with him on this one. No amount of pontificating from you is going to overrule him on this one, sorry. 

No, the authors own words do not indicate that at all.  The authors own words, so generously provided by you, show that there is a pro-Stark faction, a peace faction, and there may be a group that favors other contenders.  Note the conditional.  Moreover, and this ties into the earlier point about Stannis' letter, there are no pro-Lannister factions we know of; the pro-Baratheon folks are likely to be given pause by Stannis' letter.

And again, I'm not claiming the Vale is fully united in support of Robb.  I'm saying the majority favor Robb, and seeing as we have no contradiction by the author of that, and that the only opinions we encounter are pro-Stark, this is eminently the most reasonable and likely position.  Any large group will have divergent interests.  That doesn't mean there won't be a consensus, broadly speaking.  Bronze Yohn almost certainly represents a large portion of the Vale nobility in terms of his beliefs and views on honor, etc.  It makes sense that who he supports, many others will as well.

On 10/8/2018 at 10:09 AM, Bernie Mac said:

She, in fact, does an amazing job. There is zero civil war in the Vale while she lives. Job accomplished. 

God help your family if this is your attitude towards a "job accomplished."  Lysa is murdered by the man who is intending on murdering her son, and the moment she dies, armed conflict breaks out.  That is emphatically not a job well done; the conditions you leave after you're gone, your legacy, is what you get judged on.  The manner in which she managed Vale politics is a failure; her insistence on marrying Littlefinger instead of another lord is a massive flaw in both personal and political judgement.  Her inability to let her son go means he has neither the health, experience, or connections to escape from the thumb of his murderous stepfather.  To reiterate, upon her death the Vale breaks into a cold war entirely prompted by her decision making.  Which of these are a sign of good governance?  The eventual civil war is a result of her decision-making.  This isn't an Abraham Lincoln situation, where war is inevitable regardless of his choices.  Lysa is ultimately responsible for the Lords Declarant.  Lysa murders her husband.  Lysa coddles her child, employs musicians who mock her suitors, etc.

Or to take a parallel, look at Tywin Lannister.  At his death, the Lannisters are technically at their peak.  Secure(ish) on the Throne, feared. powerful, influential, etc.  And yet immediately following his death they start to unravel, specifically because of his actions and philosophies.  The Red Wedding wiped out some of their enemies, but has them marked out along with the Freys as untrustworthy and marked for death.  Cersei's incompetence is a direct result of Tywin not bothering to educate her, and not recognizing her inability.  Even his death is quite obviously of his own making.  The eventual collapse of Lannister power is directly tied into the methods he used to achieve it.  Lysa is the same.  You don't get to crystallize the situation at the moment of their demise and then claim everything afterwards has nothing to do with them.  That isn't how history works.

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

1 hour ago, cpg2016 said:

No, the authors own words do not indicate that at all.  The authors own words, so generously provided by you, show that there is a pro-Stark faction, a peace faction, and there may be a group that favors other contenders.  Note the conditional.  Moreover, and this ties into the earlier point about Stannis' letter, there are no pro-Lannister factions we know of; the pro-Baratheon folks are likely to be given pause by Stannis' letter.

And again, I'm not claiming the Vale is fully united in support of Robb.  I'm saying the majority favor Robb, and seeing as we have no contradiction by the author of that, and that the only opinions we encounter are pro-Stark, this is eminently the most reasonable and likely position.  Any large group will have divergent interests.  That doesn't mean there won't be a consensus, broadly speaking.  Bronze Yohn almost certainly represents a large portion of the Vale nobility in terms of his beliefs and views on honor, etc.  It makes sense that who he supports, many others will as well.

God help your family if this is your attitude towards a "job accomplished."  Lysa is murdered by the man who is intending on murdering her son, and the moment she dies, armed conflict breaks out.  That is emphatically not a job well done; the conditions you leave after you're gone, your legacy, is what you get judged on.  The manner in which she managed Vale politics is a failure; her insistence on marrying Littlefinger instead of another lord is a massive flaw in both personal and political judgement.  Her inability to let her son go means he has neither the health, experience, or connections to escape from the thumb of his murderous stepfather.  To reiterate, upon her death the Vale breaks into a cold war entirely prompted by her decision making.  Which of these are a sign of good governance?  The eventual civil war is a result of her decision-making.  This isn't an Abraham Lincoln situation, where war is inevitable regardless of his choices.  Lysa is ultimately responsible for the Lords Declarant.  Lysa murders her husband.  Lysa coddles her child, employs musicians who mock her suitors, etc.

Or to take a parallel, look at Tywin Lannister.  At his death, the Lannisters are technically at their peak.  Secure(ish) on the Throne, feared. powerful, influential, etc.  And yet immediately following his death they start to unravel, specifically because of his actions and philosophies.  The Red Wedding wiped out some of their enemies, but has them marked out along with the Freys as untrustworthy and marked for death.  Cersei's incompetence is a direct result of Tywin not bothering to educate her, and not recognizing her inability.  Even his death is quite obviously of his own making.  The eventual collapse of Lannister power is directly tied into the methods he used to achieve it.  Lysa is the same.  You don't get to crystallize the situation at the moment of their demise and then claim everything afterwards has nothing to do with them.  That isn't how history works.

I bet just before she hit the rocks, Lysa was thinking, "Yep. Nailed it."

[cpg2016]

4 hours ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

I bet just before she hit the rocks, Lysa was thinking, "Yep. Nailed it."

Well if she thinks "I rock" then maybe she's right...

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

Just now, cpg2016 said:

Well if she thinks "I rock" then maybe she's right...

I'm reminded of the exchange between Sansa and Myranda Royce. If I remember correctly:

Sansa : Lady Lysa was so wise to keep us out of the war.

Myranda : "Yes, she was the height of wisdom, that woman "

I'm certain I've got that quote wrong, but the sentiment stands. It's absurd to suggest Lysa was in any way playing a clever game. She was Littlefinger’s pawn. If he wanted her to go to war, on either side, she would have done so. He didn't, he wanted the Vale to remain out of it, so it did. When she ceased to be useful, she took a dive. 

 

[Bernie Mac]

On 10/12/2018 at 3:35 PM, cpg2016 said:

No, the authors own words do not indicate that at all.

Yeah they do. 

GeoRR: The lords of the Vale are numerous. As with any large group, their views vary.

GeoRR: "Brothers" overstates the case, but certainly Ned made friends during his years in the Eyrie... so did Robert, however, so some of the Vale houses would be just as well disposed toward Baratheon as toward Stark.

GeoRR: Do some of the them want to join Robb? Certainly. Most notably Bronze Yohn Royce. Others, however, want no part of the war, and some may even favor the other contenders.

Pretty clear, the Vale would be divided. 

On 10/12/2018 at 3:35 PM, cpg2016 said:

 

  The authors own words, so generously provided by you, show that there is a pro-Stark faction, a peace faction, and there may be a group that favors other contenders. Note the conditional.

lol come on, is this really the best you can do? 

On 10/12/2018 at 3:35 PM, cpg2016 said:

Moreover, and this ties into the earlier point about Stannis' letter, there are no pro-Lannister factions we know of; the pro-Baratheon folks are likely to be given pause by Stannis' letter.

What, because you want it to be like that? I'm going to stick with the authors words on the matter. 

On 10/12/2018 at 3:35 PM, cpg2016 said:

And again, I'm not claiming the Vale is fully united in support of Robb.  I'm saying the majority favor Robb,

Citation? 

On 10/12/2018 at 3:35 PM, cpg2016 said:

 

God help your family if this is your attitude towards a "job accomplished."

eh? The job was accomplished, that is a fact. I gave no indication on whether how good her performance was.

Why the need to get all bitchy and bring my family into the discussion?