Jump to content
Lord Varys

[SPOILERS] The Dance (unabridged version) including the reign of Viserys I

Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I expect Daeron and Tessarion originally stayed in Oldtown. The boy was barely fourteen, like Jace, in early 129 AC.

If true, that should have been mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Grey Wolf said:

If true, that should have been mentioned.

In a sense it is. Ormund would not ask for (additional) dragons if he had one at the time. Nor would the Blacks have been so confident of victory if they had known there was a dragon there - after all, they are all afraid of Tessarion when the dragon is there, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could have been phrased better.

Honestly, I feel like there should have been a dozen more major battles. That way the Dance's reputation and numbers would make more sense since the armies would be smaller but there would be more of them either in the field at the same time or were called up to replace those that fell in battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/10/2019 at 8:41 PM, The Grey Wolf said:

It could have been phrased better.

Honestly, I feel like there should have been a dozen more major battles. That way the Dance's reputation and numbers would make more sense since the armies would be smaller but there would be more of them either in the field at the same time or were called up to replace those that fell in battle.

I think the Dance of the Dragons can justify now noteworthy it is due to the large numbers of battles involving dragons, and the resulting deaths of so many dragons and Targaryens. It doesn’t need huge numbers of actual deaths in war to earn itself a reputation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/10/2019 at 8:41 PM, The Grey Wolf said:

It could have been phrased better.

Honestly, I feel like there should have been a dozen more major battles. That way the Dance's reputation and numbers would make more sense since the armies would be smaller but there would be more of them either in the field at the same time or were called up to replace those that fell in battle.

Tbh I feel like it's pretty obvious that the Lords in the Dance only sent the bare minimum. After all, why send 5 thousand men to get slaughtered by a dragon when you can send 500 knights/men at arms and a few hundred levies.

As evidence: during the Conquest, before Westeros knew how deadly dragons were, the Lannisters and Gardener's raised 55k; the biggest army ever raised. In the Conquest of Dorne, there are at least 60k men involved, probably more. And of course, RR and Wo5K sees armies numbering between 15-30k. But all three of those wars came after the dragons were long dead. The Dance is the only war with such low numbers and its conveniantly the only one in which both sides had dragons. That can't be a coincidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main thing I picked up on is that Jace was actually pretty decent. I mean I've always prefered the Black's over the Green's, but reading F&B really made me appreciate that Jace seemed to have the making of a decent ruler. He's smart, listens to advice, apparently charismatic and a good negotiator and brave. All told he seems to have been one of the most competent and rational characters in the whole war.

Also, he and Daeron struck me as quite similar. Really those two probably would have gotten along just fine if their relatives hadn't been at each others throats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked a lot of the additions/new knowledge:

-Knowing how the Battle of the Kingsroad went down. On the surface it didn't make sense that the Riverlords won but the reasoning is sound and the battle description is fun.

-Seeing how Cregan cowed everyone and an explanation for why the Lads didn't wield much power after the Dance despite having basically won the war.

-More detail about the smallfolk uprisings in KL and greater characterization for the participants, especially Ser Perkin.

-More characterization about Larys Strong. Definitely a kind of Littlefinger/Varys cross.

-More characterization about Alys Rivers and Mysaria.

-This is more beyond the scope of this topic but I found it more convincing that the Velaryons didn't lose all their wealth and naval strength in the BAttle of the Gullet as was commonly surmised.

 

However, I would have liked to know more about the nitty gritty government stuff in Viserys' reign. We know the players but we don't know what policies they made besides Daemon creating the Gold Cloaks, the Stepstones War, and the marriage/succession stuff. Otto Hightower was Hand for a long time and it would have been nice to know what his policies were. We get really detailed examinations of everyone's Small Council and policies except Viserys and his reign is kind of a blur.

 

I would have also liked more characterization for Rhaenys. She was an important and pretty fascinating character but we don't get any new info.

Share this post


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

The main thing I picked up on is that Jace was actually pretty decent. I mean I've always prefered the Black's over the Green's, but reading F&B really made me appreciate that Jace seemed to have the making of a decent ruler. He's smart, listens to advice, apparently charismatic and a good negotiator and brave. All told he seems to have been one of the most competent and rational characters in the whole war.

Also, he and Daeron struck me as quite similar. Really those two probably would have gotten along just fine if their relatives hadn't been at each others throats.

All of Rhaenyra's kids were seemingly good people (minus poking an eye out). I guess despite everything she was a decent mom

Share this post


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

Tbh I feel like it's pretty obvious that the Lords in the Dance only sent the bare minimum. After all, why send 5 thousand men to get slaughtered by a dragon when you can send 500 knights/men at arms and a few hundred levies.

As evidence: during the Conquest, before Westeros knew how deadly dragons were, the Lannisters and Gardener's raised 55k; the biggest army ever raised. In the Conquest of Dorne, there are at least 60k men involved, probably more. And of course, RR and Wo5K sees armies numbering between 15-30k. But all three of those wars came after the dragons were long dead. The Dance is the only war with such low numbers and its conveniantly the only one in which both sides had dragons. That can't be a coincidence.

The numbers in the Dance always bothered me, It makes sense why armies would be smaller to mitigate dragonroasting but then why are the Lannisters seemingly denuded of defenders when the Ironborn attack? Why do the lords struggle to combat the multiple threats that arise after the Dance if they held a lot of their armies back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SerBronnsMullet said:

The numbers in the Dance always bothered me, It makes sense why armies would be smaller to mitigate dragonroasting but then why are the Lannisters seemingly denuded of defenders when the Ironborn attack? Why do the lords struggle to combat the multiple threats that arise after the Dance if they held a lot of their armies back?

My thoughts exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dalton Greyjoy had superior force concentration and projection. If you look at how he fell on the Westerlands, he concentrated his attack at one place, then withdrew, and struck another place after dealing some big blow. First Lannisport, wiping out much of the Lannister fleet (thereby hobbling their efforts to fight back), and then after that he made free with Fair Isle, with the Farmans and their vassals essentially the only effective force. Presumably his reavers bothered the coasts and caused trouble, but those were the only two really significant actions during the Dance, and they were essentially with minimal response because he was attacking with all his strength places that didn't expect those attacks and were ill-prepared to deal with them.

After that, the lack of a Lannister fleet is what led to a long delay in freeing Fair Isle, and the essential difficulties of projecting force over water when you don't have a massive fleet meant that the fight over the Iron Islands was pitched.

So, I don't find the argument regarding the Red Kraken particularly useful. It's pretty clear why he had his limited success, and it had to do with his strategic advantage of having a fleet and needing only to go after one target at a time whereas his enemies had to spread their defenses thinly because they didn't know what he was going to target.

As to the post-Dance mess, that has quite a lot of political dimension to it more than anything. The amount of infighting at court over control of affairs often hobbled responses. But what, really, did they have to deal with where raising an army of 60,000 men would really help? The biggest military actions of the regency are Velaryon's fleet actions on the one hand, and the fight to free Fair Isle and punish the ironborn on the other, and both again depended on the logistical capacity to project forces over water, which Westeros doesn't have all that much off. Stannis had many more fighting men on the southern shore of the Blackwater than he did with his massive fleet for a reason.

 

Edited by Ran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ran said:

Dalton Greyjoy had superior force concentration and projection. If you look at how he fell on the Westerlands, he concentrated his attack at one place, then withdrew, and struck another place after dealing some big blow. First Lannisport, wiping out much of the Lannister fleet (thereby hobbling their efforts to fight back), and then after that he made free with Fair Isle, with the Farmans and their vassals essentially the only effective force. Presumably his reavers bothered the coasts and caused trouble, but those were the only two really significant actions during the Dance, and they were essentially with minimal response because he was attacking with all his strength places that didn't expect those attacks and were ill-prepared to deal with them.

After that, the lack of a Lannister fleet is what led to a long delay in freeing Fair Isle, and the essential difficulties of projecting force over water when you don't have a massive fleet meant that the fight over the Iron Islands was pitched.

So, I don't find the argument regarding the Red Kraken particularly useful. It's pretty clear why he had his limited success, and it had to do with his strategic advantage of having a fleet and needing only to go after one target at a time whereas his enemies had to spread their defenses thinly because they didn't know what he was going to target.

As to the post-Dance mess, that has quite a lot of political dimension to it more than anything. The amount of infighting at court over control of affairs often hobbled responses. But what, really, did they have to deal with where raising an army of 60,000 men would really help? The biggest military actions of the regency are Velaryon's fleet actions on the one hand, and the fight to free Fair Isle and punish the ironborn on the other, and both again depended on the logistical capacity to project forces over water, which Westeros doesn't have all that much off. Stannis had many more fighting men on the southern shore of the Blackwater than he did with his massive fleet for a reason.

 

The Crown can only muster up a few thousand to put down the civil war in the Vale and the Stormlords seemingly struggle with the Dornish raiders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That begs the question of why the Lannisters, Farmans, and Kennings lack a big fleet despite living next to the Ironborn and have more than enough resources.

Also, the text itself (either F & B or TWOIAF) says that the Westerlands were "thinly defended" because of Lord Jason taking so many east so that dog won't hunt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SerBronnsMullet said:

The Crown can only muster up a few thousand to put down the civil war in the Vale and the Stormlords seemingly struggle with the Dornish raiders.

Another good point.

Share this post


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

The Crown can only muster up a few thousand to put down the civil war in the Vale and the Stormlords seemingly struggle with the Dornish raiders.

The Crown sent a thousand men to the Vale because it wasn't believed more was needed, not because it couldn't muster it. After that, it sent 9,000 men under a royal banner, men who had to take the high road through the mountains when we know how difficult that is even for a small group. It seems perfectly sensible and hardly a small army to me, but mileage seems to vary. There appear to have been thousands more involved in the naval portion as well... I mean, just how large of an army do you expect them to send? Do they really want to wait a year to gather a hundred thousand men from all corners of the realm? Why?

The Stormlords have always struggled with Dornish raids. That's why the Marchers have such notable castles.

As to "thinly defended", that was the heavily compressed Dance in TWoIaF. It was based on the exact same text you see in F&B, but we used "thinly defended" as Yandel's shorthand explanation; Lannisport's excellent infantry was no longer on hand, making Lannisport vulnerable, and that led to a loss of a fleet, and that led to the loss of Fair Isle. F&B is a much fuller account, and you will not find "thinly defended" therein because there's more room to explain.

Edited by Ran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×