Jump to content

What if freys pro targayen in robert rebellion


History

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, History said:

What if walder frey was pro targayen from start in robert rebellion ,would the northern troops be able to help the vale/riverlands or be stuck in north?

It changes nothing for the Norths movement, who obviously take time to be raised ang get South. 

What it does change is the Riverlands theatre war, Hoster may not be in a position to bully and suppress the Riverland loyalists with Walder on side. Between the Darrys and Freys control of the Green fork we could have seen the rebel army boxed in with Rhaegar being able to make his extra numbers count. 

It obviously changes the dynamic of the war but we don't know enough to know if it would have been enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, History said:

What if walder frey was pro targayen from start in robert rebellion ,would the northern troops be able to help the vale/riverlands or be stuck in north?

None of this would matter because Rhaegar was naive enough to put his life on the line in battle.  Robert would beat Rhaegar in combat.  The royals would lose as long as Rhaegar was leading the troops.  The battle can take place anywhere and the duel will have the same outcome.  Hint to Rhaegar: stay back and trap Robert. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 9/28/2018 at 4:28 AM, Silver Bullet 1985 said:

None of this would matter because Rhaegar was naive enough to put his life on the line in battle.  Robert would beat Rhaegar in combat.  The royals would lose as long as Rhaegar was leading the troops.  The battle can take place anywhere and the duel will have the same outcome.  Hint to Rhaegar: stay back and trap Robert. 

Imo, the only reason why Rhaegar showed up was because the moral of his armies was already wavering, due to their loss at the Battle of the Bells and Aerys and Rhaegar (As their king and prince), not actually participating in the war or at least be a presence with the troops and Mace Tyell did nothing but sit and siege Storms End. If Mace Tyrell would have actually conquered Storms End, then Robert had to withdraw, with the risk of being attack in the back by the Targaryen forces that were already in the Riverlands, while he also had to consider the possibility of the Westerlands joining the Targaryen forces, since then the Targaryens would be winning and i am convinced the only reason the Freys showed up so late is to see which side would come out on top, meaning Ned and the Northerns couldn't have gone with Robert, since they needed to guard his back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably wouldn't change much. A thousand knights and three thousand foot isn't that that big of a difference when Rhaegar had 40,000 and Robert had less on the Trident.

 

10 minutes ago, nickdt said:

Imo, the only reason why Rhaegar showed up was because the moral of his armies was already wavering, due to their loss at the Battle of the Bells

I though he only showed up 'cause Aerys held Elia and his children hostage and ordered him to go. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nickdt said:

Imo, the only reason why Rhaegar showed up was because the moral of his armies was already wavering, due to their loss at the Battle of the Bells and Aerys and Rhaegar (As their king and prince), not actually participating in the war or at least be a presence with the troops and Mace Tyell did nothing but sit and siege Storms End. If Mace Tyrell would have actually conquered Storms End, then Robert had to withdraw, with the risk of being attack in the back by the Targaryen forces that were already in the Riverlands, while he also had to consider the possibility of the Westerlands joining the Targaryen forces, since then the Targaryens would be winning and i am convinced the only reason the Freys showed up so late is to see which side would come out on top, meaning Ned and the Northerns couldn't have gone with Robert, since they needed to guard his back. 

I wouldn't call 40,000 strong low morale.  Rhaegar fought Robert in single combat because he had more honor than common sense.  You do not risk the entire Targaryen monarchy for honor.  He had the advantage in numbers and therefore should have led from the back.  Tywin would have led from the back.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Silver Bullet 1985 said:

I wouldn't call 40,000 strong low morale.  Rhaegar fought Robert in single combat because he had more honor than common sense.  You do not risk the entire Targaryen monarchy for honor.  He had the advantage in numbers and therefore should have led from the back.  Tywin would have led from the back.  

Amount of troops doesn't equal Low Morale. 

Troops get Low Morale if they subsequentely lose battle after battle, which was the case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/27/2018 at 8:28 PM, Bernie Mac said:

It changes nothing for the Norths movement, who obviously take time to be raised ang get South. 

What it does change is the Riverlands theatre war, Hoster may not be in a position to bully and suppress the Riverland loyalists with Walder on side. Between the Darrys and Freys control of the Green fork we could have seen the rebel army boxed in with Rhaegar being able to make his extra numbers count. 

It obviously changes the dynamic of the war but we don't know enough to know if it would have been enough. 

Maybe my memory is failing but I don't think much significant action takes place with Riverland forces until the Trident.  Most of the battles prior to this are Robert and his Stormlanders, or the sort of preliminary actions in the Vale.  I always assumed Hoster was busy corralling his vassals prior to the Trident.  Not having the Freys would hurt, but the appearance of the Northern troops on the scene would almost certainly be enough to force the issue in Hoster's favor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/27/2018 at 6:41 PM, History said:

What if walder frey was pro targayen from start in robert rebellion ,would the northern troops be able to help the vale/riverlands or be stuck in north?

It would have helped.  Something would have to be done about the Tullys so they can't attack from the south though.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/12/2018 at 4:21 PM, cpg2016 said:

Maybe my memory is failing but I don't think much significant action takes place with Riverland forces until the Trident. 

The war is around a year long, we are in the dark about much of it. 

The Targaryens had lost a number of battles (and had also won some), but they weren't really losing the war until the Trident and the Sack of King's Landing....I haven't gone into the whole history of the fighting, but there was a good deal more to it than just two armies meeting on the Trident. There were a number of earlier battles, sieges, escapes, ambushes, duels, and forays, and fighting in places as farflung as the Vale and the Dornish Marches.

We know that Hoster had his own infighting to do, with the likes of the Darrys, Mootons, Lychesters and Goodbrooks. 

"Who did it, then?" asked Gendry.
"Hoster Tully." Notch was a stooped thin grey-haired man, born in these parts. "This was Lord Goodbrook's village. When Riverrun declared for Robert, Goodbrook stayed loyal to the king, so Lord Tully came down on him with fire and sword. After the Trident, Goodbrook's son made his peace with Robert and Lord Hoster, but that didn't help the dead none."
 
The neighbouring Westerlands joining the Crown gives the Royalists an edge in the Riverlands. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...