Jump to content
Cron

Bran Truly Was The Best Possible Choice To Rule

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, StoneColdJorahMormont said:

Again that would just be guessing, someone that's had nothing wanting to live an easy life and get away from the life of a cut throat, doesn't automatically mean he wants to climb the ladder and become king.... little finger showed no interest in being rich he wanted power, Bronn has never shown any interest in titles or power its always been about the Gold, but he has gotten lucky and got both.

This is where my point is actually going to backfire because I don't believe Bran has ever used the ability to change what is meant to be, I actually believe he has had the ability for a long time but never revealed having it as it would be dangerous if others knew he could.

So my point about him being able to see what others are planning and acting on it isn't really a good one as I believe he wouldn't attempt to change what is meant to be even if meant he would be killed.

 

Being king offers more gold than lord of highgarden. 

Share this post


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

Being king offers more gold than lord of highgarden. 

Well I guess that anyone that wants to succeed in life financially is likely to double cross someone if they got the chance to make more money.. all greedy people would never be happy at some point in their life and continue to want to scheme and fight to make more of it.

I just thought maybe once Bronn had made enough coin to live a comfortable and happy life where he didn't need to kill to get by he might look to settle down and have a family... 

I mean I would imagine if Bronn had wanted the position as Master of War he could have had it as he is experienced enough.. but the fact he isn't shows he might not want to be part of that life no more.

Then again there might not even be a Master of War, not having this position filled reinforces their position on things being peaceful and only appoint one of a threat that cant be reasoned with arose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sad truth is, we don't know if Bran will be a good king or not, because we don't know Bran. The writers never let us get to know him. I guess the guy they sideswipe us with as king wasn't important enough for us to spend any quality time with onscreen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, StoneColdJorahMormont said:

Well I guess that anyone that wants to succeed in life financially is likely to double cross someone if they got the chance to make more money.. all greedy people would never be happy at some point in their life and continue to want to scheme and fight to make more of it.

 

Bronn has this exact track record. Not everyone does.

22 minutes ago, StoneColdJorahMormont said:

I just thought maybe once Bronn had made enough coin to live a comfortable and happy life where he didn't need to kill to get by he might look to settle down and have a family... 

Nothing bronn has ever done has indicated such. 

 

22 minutes ago, StoneColdJorahMormont said:

I mean I would imagine if Bronn had wanted the position as Master of War he could have had it as he is experienced enough.. but the fact he isn't shows he might not want to be part of that life no more.

We don't know if he was offered the position of Master of war and he rejected it. Even if he did, we don't know if that would be because he wanted no part of that life, or whether he just wanted a more comfortable position where he didn't have to put in too much work.

22 minutes ago, StoneColdJorahMormont said:

Then again there might not even be a Master of War, not having this position filled reinforces their position on things being peaceful and only appoint one of a threat that cant be reasoned with arose.

Tyrion explicitly said he would bring suitable candidates before bran to fill the position of master of war.

Edited by Apoplexy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Can’t the host body of the three eyed raven live for thousands of years? Did they unwittingly elect a dictator that will rule for all time?

Edited by Higgins86

Share this post


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

Yes, inspiring loyalty is extremely important. Not having that ability is a stumbling block but not insurmountable. My point is there are ways to inspire loyalty other than being charismatic. Bran already has the loyalty of all the major houses in Westeros due simply to his being the best person to be made king.

 

She was unloved because she was a foreign Targaryen invader who came to Westeros with her dragons and her armies demanding everyone bend the knee to her for no more reason than because she was the daughter of an evil king whom they hated. Not to mention they remember what happened the last time a Targaryen invaded with his dragons (something Dany was counting on). If that happened in the real world (and it has), how would you react?

Thrown out the window is an overstatement, but yes, they took the first step in abolishing feudal monarchy by changing the way succession to the throne is determined. So now the power balance between king and nobles has changed, but that's all. The rest of feudalism is still alive and well.

If you were a Dany fan, I would think you would appreciate this particular development because the abuses of power in the feudal system is part of the wheel Dany wanted to break!

Bran has the loyalty of all the major houses in Westeros because the script said so. It makes no sense in a plausible feudal setting that an emotionless crippled foreign teenager who is of debatable humanity and has practically no experience in government or war would be elected as King. Bran shouldn't have the loyalty of anyone aside from his family and his reign should be a disaster. 

Daenerys was born on Dragonstone and is the last living member of House Targaryen the family that created the Seven Kingdoms and ruled it for centuries. This idea that she would be viewed as a foreign invader rather than a welcome claimant in the face of usurping murderess Queen Cersei is absurd. The last time a Targaryen invaded with dragons they crushed or vassalized everyone except Dorne and rewarded those who submitted. No one should want to fight Daenerys and lords should be lining up to bend the knee in the hopes of being elevated for their loyalty and service. The common people would be at worst indifferent and in reality quite open to the idea of a Queen who will bring back the good old days of stability and peace instead of the constant state of civil war that has existed since Robert's death particularly those directly affected by Cersei's rule. I mean how bad could Dany possibly be perceived in comparison to a woman who blew up the Westerosi equivalent of the Pope and hundreds of courtiers, murdered her popular daughter-in law and her entire family, her own uncle and cousin, had been marched naked through the streets for adultery, is suspected of producing incest babies with her brother that triggered the War of the Five Kings, would be widely suspected of murdering her own son to usurp the throne and has a zombie bodyguard that goes around murdering people who insult her?

It's not an overstatement. You cannot tell me with a straight face that someone like Bran would be elected king or that his reign wouldn't immediately be a disaster even if we buy that the ridiculous Council at the Dragonpit could be coerced or stacked in Bran's favor. 

I'm not a Dany fan. I'm a fan of what this show used to at least try to be in terms of realism and politics. This is was what brought the show mainstream acclaim and it's been utterly trashed for seasons now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Apoplexy said:

Bronn has this exact track record. Not everyone does.

Nothing bronn has ever done has indicated such. 

 

We don't know if he was offered the position of Master of coin and he rejected it. Even if he did, we don't know if that would be because he wanted no part of that life, or whether he just wanted a more comfortable position where he didn't have to put in too much work.

Tyrion explicitly said he would bring suitable candidates before bran to fill the position of master of war.

Yeah I just rewatched I missed it my bad.

But again we are both just assuming that Bronn will act one way or the other and unfortunately will never know. Yes track record would point to him possibly continuing as he as up till now, but again he was never in the financially stable position he is in now.

He had to be tempted quite a bit by Jaime if I recall correctly when he had that castle and the ugly wife that came with it.. yes he did give in but who knows maybe now that his title/land and position doesn't include being married to someone he has no interest in he might be content.

I actually would love a one off episode to see how their stories played out or even just an update to read, would love to see if Jon ever saw Arya again or if she ever went back and settled with Gendry once she grew older etc..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Higgins86 said:

Can’t the host body of the three eyed raven live for thousands of years? Did they unwittingly elect a dictator that will rule for all time?

That probably depended on the magic of the children of the forest, so bran presumably won’t be any more long lived than a normal human. 

Bloodraven couldn’t survive without the tree, I think they mentioned

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Higgins86 said:

Can’t the host body of the three eyed raven live for thousands of years? Did they unwittingly elect a dictator that will rule for all time?

It's only an issue if he isn't a good ruler, if he turns out to be a good one then that must be a bonus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Bran the Shipper said:

Also Bran must have grabbed some major power to not only allow Sam to become a maester but to then name him Grand Maester.  The position of Grand Maester is supposed to be selected by the citadel and I doubt the would choose a disgraced thief as their representative.

Bran doesn't need 'major power' do this.  Just make the request.  Why would he Citadel say no?  The Citadel should want peace restored, the realm rebuilt, and want good relations with the new King.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The One Who Kneels said:

Bran has the loyalty of all the major houses in Westeros because the script said so. It makes no sense in a plausible feudal setting that an emotionless crippled foreign teenager who is of debatable humanity and has practically no experience in government or war would be elected as King.

 

Actually, the bolded is not true, and we know it.  Bran has the memories of Bloodraven, who was Hand of the King for 2 Kings and who fought in Blackfyre rebellions and who was Lord Commander of the Nights Watch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Apoplexy said:

Because tyrion could pay him more. There might come a day when tryrion's enemies could pay him a higher price. The iron bank comes to mind. That was a plotline the show just abandoned.

To be a Lord and a Warden, Bronn would have to swear some oaths.  Any move against Tyrion would be a move agaisnt the King and likely cost Bronn Highgarden and the Wardenship of the Reach.  To say nothing of his seat on the council and his knightly title.  And maybe his life.  That would have be some serious gold to cause Bronn to risk all of that.

Edited by Tywin Tytosson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The One Who Kneels said:

Bran has the loyalty of all the major houses in Westeros because the script said so. It makes no sense in a plausible feudal setting that an emotionless crippled foreign teenager who is of debatable humanity and has practically no experience in government or war would be elected as King. Bran shouldn't have the loyalty of anyone aside from his family and his reign should be a disaster.

Sure, cuz there are no real world or "Westerosi world" precedents for an inexperienced teenager to become king. And why are you so hung up on the fact that he is crippled? I've already stated what unique qualifications Bran has, so I won't repeat that here. And again, the old way wasn't working, so they're trying a new way.

To say feudal monarchy has been totally thrown out the window when they've only changed one aspect of it is ludicrous. There is much more to feudal monarchy than just how kings are chosen, and that is all still intact. Plus, although this is inspired by medieval Europe, it's not. It's a fictional world of Jordan's making so to expect everything to follow medieval European feudalism exactly limits the creativity of the author.

I was not comparing Dany to Cersei. Of course Cersei was an evil tyrant who needed to be overthrown and executed. I was evaluating Dany based mainly on her own merits, but also that of her ancestors. It was not all good times when the Targaryens ruled. Have you forgotten their civil war? How many of them were crazy? There's a reason for the saying "every time a Targaryen is born the gods flip a coin". Her father burned people alive! And now that's Dany's method of execution. Just because I wouldn't want Cersei as queen doesn't mean I'd want Dany either. And she was a foreign invader in the eyes of the Westerosi. She never lived there; they didn't know her from Eve. And talk about inspiring loyalty? You don't inspire loyalty by demanding people bend the knee or die. That's inspiring fear.

4 hours ago, The One Who Kneels said:

It's not an overstatement. You cannot tell me with a straight face that someone like Bran would be elected king or that his reign wouldn't immediately be a disaster even if we buy that the ridiculous Council at the Dragonpit could be coerced or stacked in Bran's favor.

No, I can't say his reign would immediately be a disaster. That's just your opinion. He's inexperienced, but he has knowledge no one else has, and he has advisors. Every good king has good advisors and listens to them. Only time can tell what his reign would be.

4 hours ago, The One Who Kneels said:

I'm a fan of what this show used to at least try to be in terms of realism and politics.

Realism? You mean with the dragons, a woman who can't be harmed by fire, priestesses who raise people from the dead, malevolent ice monsters and zombies, assassins who can wear other people's faces, etc. You mean that level of realism. It's a fantasy series. If it's not realistic enough for you, I would suggest you give up on fantasy.

You and I are clearly gonna have to agree to disagree.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Nightwish said:

I don't know, this is not implied by the script but for me this doesn't play a role. He is either evil or useless (for all his powers did nothing to help), only sat there and waited to be rescued. So... nada being a King was not earned and it has the feeling that the writers just wanted a use for the character but again without any build-up or development. 

"waiting for an old friend", "Why do i think came here ?", Drogon flying over Kings Landing, etc it means he can see the future and he knows he can alter the future. he saw the future and start a chain reaction

with Jaimie dead, Tyrion wouldn`t betrayed Danny, without truth about Targaryen parentage Jon wouldn`t have killed her or Danny paranoid.

it`s not implied in the script but this is where it leads.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The One Who Kneels said:

Bran has the loyalty of all the major houses in Westeros because the script said so. It makes no sense in a plausible feudal setting that an emotionless crippled foreign teenager who is of debatable humanity and has practically no experience in government or war would be elected as King. Bran shouldn't have the loyalty of anyone aside from his family and his reign should be a disaster. 

He has no experience in governing or war, but he has the ability to look into the past and learn from literally all the people living the last 8000 years. In addition to that, if he chooses his adivisors (Hand, Master of ... and so on) wisely, he don't have to be competent in all that right away. That may come with time. And who is better at choosing advisors then an quasi-omniscient person, who can take a look at someones life to get a very good picture of his strengths, weaknesses, loyalty and so on?

And concerning the loyalties: He has the support of the North (I know, the North is independent, but they won't trouble him and will live peacefully together),the Westlands, the Vale and the Riverlands. He has the loyalty of Bronn by promoting him to Lord of the Reach and making him Master of Coin. So only Dorne ist left, but I think the new Lord of Dorne (not a Martell) might have other problems than rebelling against Bran. And we shouldn't left out that Westeros has seen a long time of constant wars. The War of the Five Kings, The War Against the White Walkers, the War Against Cersei and Daenerys, maybe the Lords of Westeros have learnt a thing or two and will be peaceful for a time (at least to replenish the decimated armies, rebuild destoryed castles, restore devastated areas and so on).

6 hours ago, The One Who Kneels said:

Daenerys was born on Dragonstone and is the last living member of House Targaryen the family that created the Seven Kingdoms and ruled it for centuries. This idea that she would be viewed as a foreign invader rather than a welcome claimant in the face of usurping murderess Queen Cersei is absurd. The last time a Targaryen invaded with dragons they crushed or vassalized everyone except Dorne and rewarded those who submitted. No one should want to fight Daenerys and lords should be lining up to bend the knee in the hopes of being elevated for their loyalty and service. The common people would be at worst indifferent and in reality quite open to the idea of a Queen who will bring back the good old days of stability and peace instead of the constant state of civil war that has existed since Robert's death particularly those directly affected by Cersei's rule. I mean how bad could Dany possibly be perceived in comparison to a woman who blew up the Westerosi equivalent of the Pope and hundreds of courtiers, murdered her popular daughter-in law and her entire family, her own uncle and cousin, had been marched naked through the streets for adultery, is suspected of producing incest babies with her brother that triggered the War of the Five Kings, would be widely suspected of murdering her own son to usurp the throne and has a zombie bodyguard that goes around murdering people who insult her?

To be fair, the Targaryen rule wasn't as peaceful as you pictured it. Yes, the Targaryens had good kings, but they also had bad ones, cruel ones, mad ones. They took the Iron Throne by force (or conquest) and they had Dragons to suppress everyone, who was against them. And when there wasn't any they started a civil war called Dance of Dragons with a massive use of dragons. Not to mention the Blackfyre Rebellions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, joaozinm said:

Show bran has be awkwardly staring até people and trees for 2 Seasons.

There was a season earlier that bran doesnt even appear.

He clearly can see the present and Future cause he keeps one lining everyone like: you're exactly what you should be doing. (Doesnt know where the fuck is drogon, though, or any useful information at all)

He doesnt want to be king and doesnt show any sign of interest in a game of thrones. His fate was always bound to the "great war" (an 1 hour Night actually).

Since he has done nothing his choice os totally unbelievable.

His moral is now dubious.

The only thing he has done, revealing Jon heritage, triggered the biggest crime in The series.

 You can buy this crap that he is this manipulative being but It not shown on the screen.

Show bran as king makes no sense at all. Maybe book bran Will.

Jon could have chosen not to tell Dany. He just didnt know her as well. But it was his fault for keeling to her too soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2019 at 4:17 AM, Cron said:

If I lived in Westeros, there is no character we have seen that I would rather have as king or queen than Bran, and I'm glad that was the judgment of the characters who actually made the decision, too. 

I agree to an extent. While I have endless issues with the lack of build up towards it due to how rushed the story was and how poorly executed Bran's transformation was, ultimately he is a better choice to rule than anyone simply on the basis that he is capable of seeing the bigger picture.

He seemed perfectly happy to allow those on his council to govern the day-to-day rulings, only checking to make sure they have turned up and are doing their jobs properly - and they know he can still oversee them even when he's not in the room so he will catch them before they try to pull any politic intrigues. Yes, perhaps it does have a sense of "Big Brother is Watching" but... he's not really. Bran only seems to concern himself with the big players. 

In the end, he is the closest thing to the "philosopher king" Westeros can get. The point of the Dragon Pit council was to try and select someone among them to rule and, admittedly a little too easily, they agreed that someone who has that level of overseeing ability and impartiality was the best choice. 

This wasn't a perfect way to implement Bran as the King but I do see the logic and feel it is sound enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am comfortable with Bran as King of the Six Kingdoms (GRRM's original ending).

I am not comfortable with Bronn as Master of Coin (HBO's fan fiction ending).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, StoneColdJorahMormont said:

Yeah I just rewatched I missed it my bad.

But again we are both just assuming that Bronn will act one way or the other and unfortunately will never know. Yes track record would point to him possibly continuing as he as up till now, but again he was never in the financially stable position he is in now.

He had to be tempted quite a bit by Jaime if I recall correctly when he had that castle and the ugly wife that came with it.. yes he did give in but who knows maybe now that his title/land and position doesn't include being married to someone he has no interest in he might be content.

I actually would love a one off episode to see how their stories played out or even just an update to read, would love to see if Jon ever saw Arya again or if she ever went back and settled with Gendry once she grew older etc..

Yeah, I'm not denying that bronn is capable of changing. But I have serious doubts about it. Cheers!

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

×