Jump to content
norwaywolf123

Which Freys deserve to die for what House Frey did to House Stark?

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, norwaywolf123 said:

Everyone, some or none?

Let's take a different tact.

In story the people are fighting over the same stuff William Wallace and Robert the Bruce fought over.

Let's pretend the north land of Westeros is Scotland and the Iron Throne resides in England.

Of course there were no Others or CotF or dragons (the magical flying type).

This is a broad general condensating statement ----

This reader took a liking to the Starks.

Stannis is next after King Bob due to the bastard incest children.

In story the the minions do not agree with me.

Let's say Roose threw in with Frey & Lannister when Roose married Frey.

Looking from the outside in Robb Stark was a traitor to the Throne.

All he wanted was:

A Clash of Kings - Catelyn I     "First, the queen must release my sisters and provide them with transport by sea from King's Landing to White Harbor. It is to be understood that Sansa's betrothal to Joffrey Baratheon is at an end.  <snip>    "Secondly, my lord father's bones will be returned to us, so he may rest beside his brother and sister in the crypts beneath Winterfell, as he would have wished.   The remains of the men of his household guard who died in his service at King's Landing must also be returned."  <snip>   "Third, my father's greatsword Ice will be delivered to my hand, here at Riverrun." <snip>     "Lastly, King Joffrey and the Queen Regent must renounce all claims to dominion over the north. Henceforth we are no part of their realm, but a free and independent kingdom, as of old. Our domain shall include all the Stark lands north of the Neck, and in addition the lands watered by the River Trident and its vassal streams, bounded by the Golden Tooth to the west and the Mountains of the Moon in the east."

Except I know there was wheeling and dealing going on. Lie upon lie.

I could say Frey was loyal to the Throne.

Guess it depends upon ones view point.

House Frey isn't gonna be wiped out.

LSH does deserve her due.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tucu said:

It doesn't matter if they deserve to die. GRRM gave them weasel-like faces and then created the "weasel soup". Freys will be prey for the northmen escaping the white cold.

Those zombified northmen are going to come as wights.  Those northern wights will come knocking at The Twins gate and it's not to deliver pizza.  

House Frey will suffer casualties but not as great as the northmen.  A casual glance at the map will prove this.  The Others and their wights will go through the north.  All who are in their path, including Winterfell, will lose and get turned to wights.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Clegane'sPup said:

I could say Frey was loyal to the Throne.

Frey is loyal to himself. If he was loyal to the Baratheons/Lannisters he wouldn't of set up a marriage alliance to make his daughter Queen in the North, if he was loyal to the Starks he wouldn't of conspired to have Robb killed. I'm not saying he was right or wrong, but that is the fact of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, King Aegon I Targaryen said:

Frey is loyal to himself. If he was loyal to the Baratheons/Lannisters he wouldn't of set up a marriage alliance to make his daughter Queen in the North, if he was loyal to the Starks he wouldn't of conspired to have Robb killed. I'm not saying he was right or wrong, but that is the fact of it. 

Okay that is the part you wish to discuss.

Frey is loyal to himself.

He has the twin towers and his bridge. He is suppose to be a banner-man of Tully (Riverland's).

The price Stark had to pay to get the RR (Tully) quickly was marriage to one of Frey's children to a Stark and the betrothal of another child to a child.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, King Aegon I Targaryen said:

Frey is loyal to himself.

As are the majority of Lords, that has always been apparent, even more so after reading Fire & Blood. 

Quote

If he was loyal to the Baratheons/Lannisters he wouldn't of set up a marriage alliance to make his daughter Queen in the North,

He didn't. Robb was not calling himself a king when Cat negotiated the alliance, nor was he intending to declare independence.  These are events that happened later, that Walder had zero say in. 

Quote

 

if he was loyal to the Starks he wouldn't of conspired to have Robb killed.

He was loyal to Robb up until Robb betrayed him, took a deep stinking crap on the alliance that had seen over a thousand Frey men lose their lives. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/1116

Quote

Question:

We know that Roose Bolton had already taken Walda Frey to wife before Robb married Jeyne Westerling. Does this then mean that Walder Frey had already planned to ally himself with Bolton to murder Robb before Robb's marriage betrayal, or was his anger towards Robb and his reasoning towards his own family as to why Robb had to be killed more than just a pretext, and the genuine reason for the Red Wedding?

GRRM:

"What if" questions are impossible to answer with any certainty... knowing old Lord Walder's character, it is likely he would have searched for some way to disentangle himself from a losing cause sooner or later, but his desertion would likely have taken a less savage form. The Red Wedding was motivated by his desire to wash out the dishonor that was done him...

As for Bolton, if you reread all his sections carefully, I think you will see a picture of a man keeping all his options open as long as he could... sniffing the wind, covering his tracks, ready to jump either way... even as late as his supper with Jaime at Harrenhal...

 

Edited by Lollygag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears the Freys are heading for rough times in both the Riverlands and the North, even if the Bolton/Frey alliance succeeds in putting down Stannis and his supporters.  Ramsay will not want the Dreadfort or Winterfell to be filled a large number of Freys that he can't overpower. Poor Walda will be in constant danger, for her children will be a threat to Ramsay and his future rule of the North. Roose is the only thing keeping the Frey/Bolton alliance together, if Roose should die before Ramsay Walda and her children will be in great danger.  I suspect little Walder Frey won't be the only Frey to die in the North under mysterious circumstances. Ramsay is playing the long game and Freys in the North are not apart of it. If the Freys in the North think that they will be safe held up in the Dreadfort it will be a mistake, I'm guessing Ramsay knows that castle and it's servants and guards better than them. Even if Lord Walder wants to fight for his progeny in the North he'll have a damn hard time doing it, as he'll have to deal with winter and possibly even a Ramsay maned Moat Callin.

In short, the Freys that went North will most likely not be coming back, and Ramsay is just as likely to kill them as anyone else. Unless the Freys are expecting Ramsay to make a move and take him out first.

Edited by Ralphis Baratheon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Lollygag said:

Neither the Starks nor the Lannisters forced the Freys to do squat.

The Starks could have accepted that they would not cross. Though the Freys could perhaps just refuse to let them cross.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, norwaywolf123 said:

The Starks could have accepted that they would not cross. Though the Freys could perhaps just refuse to let them cross.

With Ned, Sansa, and presumably Arya all captive to the Lannisters, with Catelyn believing that the Lannisters were part of a conspiracy to kill the last Hand in Jon Arryn, attempting to kill Bran, and Ned accused of treason? That'd be f***ed up if they just threw up their hands and said "oh well...", abandoned their family to die and went back home. Not to mention terrible writing.

The Freys did refuse to let them cross unless they agreed to a long list of requirements including marrying into the Starks through both Robb and Arya. Walder could have let them cross and both the Lannisters and Starks would have considered the Freys still neutral in the conflict. But he got greedy...

 

 

Edited by Lollygag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

As are the majority of Lords, that has always been apparent, even more so after reading Fire & Blood. 

I wasn't saying that the rest of the Lords weren't, someone said you could say that the Freys where loyal to the Iron Throne, I was simply saying they were loyal to themselves. 

Share this post


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

With Ned, Sansa, and presumably Arya all captive to the Lannisters, with Catelyn believing that the Lannisters were part of a conspiracy to kill the last Hand in Jon Arryn, attempting to kill Bran, and Ned accused of treason? That'd be f***ed up if they just threw up their hands and said "oh well...", abandoned their family to die and went back home. Not to mention terrible writing.

The Freys did refuse to let them cross unless they agreed to a long list of requirements including marrying into the Starks through both Robb and Arya. Walder could have let them cross and both the Lannisters and Starks would have considered the Freys still neutral in the conflict. But he got greedy...

I meant that the Stark host could have proceeded south without crossing Frey controlled bridges. Instead they would march south to confront Tywin's host. If not they may attempt to force a crossing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, norwaywolf123 said:

The Starks could have accepted that they would not cross. Though the Freys could perhaps just refuse to let them cross.

It's not simple for Lord Walder.  Catelyn's kidnapping of Tyrion really placed him between a rock and hard place.  Lord Walder could refuse to let them cross, but then Robb and the northmen would attack The Twins.  And what if Robb's side managed to work out a peace deal with King's Landing?  Hoster and the Tullys might do to the Freys what they did to Lord Goodbrook's family when they sided with their king during the rebellion.   Walder had to make a choice.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, norwaywolf123 said:

I meant that the Stark host could have proceeded south without crossing Frey controlled bridges. Instead they would march south to confront Tywin's host. If not they may attempt to force a crossing.

Gotcha.

But the reason why the Freys and the Twins are in a powerful position is because it's so swampy and difficult to cross. With an army, it sounds impossible. It's also a big reason why the North has been difficult to conquer. If there were any other plausible options, they would have taken them rather than let themselves be forced into bed with the Freys, quite literally in the case of Robb and Arya.

AGOT Sansa I

Sansa shuddered. They had been twelve days crossing the Neck, rumbling down a crooked causeway through an endless black bog, and she had hated every moment of it. The air had been damp and clammy, the causeway so narrow they could not even make proper camp at night, they had to stop right on the kingsroad. Dense thickets of half-drowned trees pressed close around them, branches dripping with curtains of pale fungus. Huge flowers bloomed in the mud and floated on pools of stagnant water, but if you were stupid enough to leave the causeway to pluck them, there were quicksands waiting to suck you down, and snakes watching from the trees, and lizard-lions floating half-submerged in the water, like black logs with eyes and teeth.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

 

But the reason why the Freys and the Twins are in a powerful position is because it's so swampy and difficult to cross.

You are mistaken, the Twins are not located in the Neck, they are in the Riverlands.

38 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

With an army, it sounds impossible. It's also a big reason why the North has been difficult to conquer. If there were any other plausible options, they would have taken them rather than let themselves be forced into bed with the Freys, quite literally in the case of Robb and Arya.

There was plausible other options

  • Robb could have taken the Kingsroad
  • Robb could have sent a raven and actually asked permission at Moat Cailin rather than just turn up (notice he has since learnt his lesson as he does not simply turn up at the Gates of the Moon expecting entry)
  • Robb, like the Tyrells, could have built barges to cross

Robb, like the Freys, had options, he chose the option that seemed most convenient at the time, likely knowing full well that he'd back out at the first opportunity. 

 

7 hours ago, King Aegon I Targaryen said:

I wasn't saying that the rest of the Lords weren't, someone said you could say that the Freys where loyal to the Iron Throne, I was simply saying they were loyal to themselves. 

Their argument, when Cat was demanding entry, was that to do so would be breaking their oath to the crown. By not allowing the Northern army access to their lands they were being loyal to the crown. 

But yeah, obviously the Freys, like every other House, put themselves first. Sacrificing yourself for two powers who could care less about you is pointless. 

 

9 hours ago, Lollygag said:

With Ned, Sansa, and presumably Arya all captive to the Lannisters, with Catelyn believing that the Lannisters were part of a conspiracy to kill the last Hand in Jon Arryn, attempting to kill Bran, and Ned accused of treason? That'd be f***ed up if they just threw up their hands and said "oh well...", abandoned their family to die and went back home. Not to mention terrible writing.

Obeying the law is now terrible writing?

Ned commited a crime, Robb decided to ignore the law of the land and go to war. Imagine every time a Stark arrested a northern noble for a crime that House then rebelled, it would be chaos. 

9 hours ago, Lollygag said:

The Freys did refuse to let them cross unless they agreed to a long list of requirements

It was not a long list, it was a pretty short list. Two marriages!

Cat was able to negotiate hostages sent to Winterfell and military support from the Freys that exceeded the amount that any of the Northern lords had supplied.

9 hours ago, Lollygag said:

including marrying into the Starks through both Robb and Arya.

That was it. 

9 hours ago, Lollygag said:

 

Walder could have let them cross and both the Lannisters and Starks would have considered the Freys still neutral in the conflict.

 No they would not. Allowing a 20k army to cross is not being neutral. 

9 hours ago, Lollygag said:

But he got greedy...

Just like Robb's grandfather Hoster did during Robert's Rebellion or Robb's ancestor Cregan Stark during the Dance of the Dragons.

Walder's actions are not unique, powerful lords with no interest in a war expect to be rewarded for taking part. 

 

Share this post


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

 No they would not. Allowing a 20k army to cross is not being neutral. 

This notion of inaction not being the neural thing to do is odd. The only way to actually be neutral in this instance would be to do absolutely nothing to aid either side. If Robb and his rebellion can’t proceed as smoothly as they want because the Freys won’t let the rebels use their bridge to cross, the Freys still aren’t violating their claim at being neutral. Actually giving any sort of aid to either side would. Or attacking one of the sides(when not attacked first) would.  

 

 

Share this post


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

 

Just like Robb's grandfather Hoster did during Robert's Rebellion or Robb's ancestor Cregan Stark during the Dance of the Dragons.

Walder's actions are not unique, powerful lords with no interest in a war expect to be rewarded for taking part. 

  

I would qualify Cregan’s action here in this specific instance,  as slightly worse given he sort of waited until literally the woman he actually promised to support was dead before actually doing anything.  After Lord Walder struck an agreement with Catelyn he at least didn’t procrastinate in giving his aid when he declared he would do just that. Truth be told I rolled my eyes when Cregan went “The north remembers.” As if he should be praised for just now intervening in a civil war that was basically over. God I hope, when the Boltons lose the north, we won’t see some northern house come at the last possible second, when the Boltons are already finally kicked out of of power proclaiming “The north remembers” when they haven’t  actually done anything to help dispose of the Boltons. 

Edited by Varysblackfyre321

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Starks are guilty of slaughtering too.  They slaughtered many families and drove them to extinction during their war to take the north.  I wish forgiveness for the Freys.  After all, Robb betrayed and disrespected them.  

Edited by Only 89 selfies today

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2018 at 3:29 PM, norwaywolf123 said:

Everyone, some or none?

Nobody deserves to die ever. But the Freys aren't real so its not as bad wanting their deaths. 

The Freys have some scapegoat to them: all sorts of bad traits are being attached to them both in-world and without (they are despicable in a hundred different ways) and most of us (and most westerosi) are just waiting for them to get what they deserve (kill the scapegoat and kill the hundred kinds of despicable).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2018 at 10:57 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

This notion of inaction not being the neural thing to do is odd. The only way to actually be neutral in this instance would be to do absolutely nothing to aid either side. If Robb and his rebellion can’t proceed as smoothly as they want because the Freys won’t let the rebels use their bridge to cross, the Freys still aren’t violating their claim at being neutral. Actually giving any sort of aid to either side would. Or attacking one of the sides(when not attacked first) would.  

 

 

Real world example of neutrality: Sweden let the nazis use our ports and railroads to ship stuff to/from occupied Norway in WW2, and everyone called it neutrality and pretended like its raining.

So technically the Freys could have opened the bridge and just let them pass and still claim neutrality.

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

×