Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Putin

Which of Baratheon brothers you respect the most

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, frenin said:

If Robert believed him he'd marry asap and father trueborn kids or he could just legitimize Edric

IF. If Robert believed him. If it was just Stannis, he more then likely wouldn't have believed it.

5 hours ago, frenin said:

start hiring sellswords for the moment the war erupted.

Well, when did you want him to start? After the Blackwater. Of course that when the war started he hired sellswords.

3 hours ago, Trigger Warning said:

The guy that cries about Ned stealing the position of hand to his grieving widow in the same breath as offering his condolences?

To be fair nobody said Stannis wasn't super entitled at the beginning.

1 hour ago, Bernie Mac said:

Until a son was born to him

Strike your banners and come to me before dawn, and I will grant you Storm's End and your old seat on the council and even name you my heir until a son is born to me. Otherwise, I shall destroy you."

That is to say, never. Stannis will never have a son. So he is offering Renly the position of heir.

2 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

He promised till dawn and attacked him before. One brother was honourable, the  other not.

Are you really blaming Mel's actions on Stannis?

2 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:
Quote

 

(if you say he killed him, please look a bit earlier in the conversation, we talked that to death).

He was responsible for his death. There is a reason why he is peacefully asleep when everyone else is preparing for battle.

Again, look in the thread. Yes he probably saw what the shadow-baby was seeing, but that doesn't mean he murdered him. Between Mel and Stannis it's clear that Mel would be the one in control of the bloody thing. Stannis at most experienced what was happening, but as a passive observer.

Share this post


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

That is to say, never. Stannis will never have a son. So he is offering Renly the position of heir

This can't be known & it's clear Stannis intends on trying to have a son.

2 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Are you really blaming Mel's actions on Stannis?

Doesn't the fact that Stannis was abed when he should have been readying himself for battle indicate at the very least he knew Mel's intentions & ok'd them? 

2 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Again, look in the thread. Yes he probably saw what the shadow-baby was seeing, but that doesn't mean he murdered him. Between Mel and Stannis it's clear that Mel would be the one in control of the bloody thing. Stannis at most experienced what was happening, but as a passive observer

I don't think he can be named a passive observer. Mel would never have went through with killing Stannis's brother without his approval. The very fact that he is abed is proof he knew what was going to happen & he isn't speaking against it. He is sleeping, knowing there will be no battle.

Share this post


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

For the crown? Debatable, given past rulings.

As you say debatable, the rulings however were more case by case than a general thing. The "Iron precedence" never got to be fully imposed.

 

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

He'll soon have the Redwyne fleet. His attack on Kings Landing was by land.

Stannis needed Renly more than Renly needed Stannis and yet Renly was the only one offering something in return.

As long as the twins were hostages really doubtful. His attack was by land by having the royal fleet is always a plus isn't it??

Stannis offered something in return as well, you just dismiss it. Besides no one has ever argued that Stannis is best negotiator on the land.

 

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Sure, Renly tried to reason and to bargain with Stannis

As much as Stannis did.

 

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

No one claimed otherwise. I claimed that Stannis needed Renly far more than Renly needed what Stannis had.

Sure.

 

 

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Yes.

Doubtful, you uderestimated how much of a factor is pride.

 

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

One brother has a 100k army and support of more lords than the other brother with a 5k army.

This is about common sense, not about who is the oldest. Stannis, without magic, can't win. From Renly's perspective Stannis would give in.

This is indeed about being the oldest, Stannis did not care how many people Renly had, he was still his younger brother.

 

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

We don't know that.

Robert was not the rightful King, but it benefited Stannis for his brother to usurp his cousins throne.

We do know that.

Stannis answers to your question, Robert was his oldest brother, he followed him, he would never bowed to his younger brother, with or without Meli.

 

 

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Glade you agree.

Didn't agree.

 

 

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

He does not offer him anything

He does not offer him anything. Something that does not exist is not small or simple, it is non-existent.

Heir pressumptive.

 

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Which he would have been anyway until Stannis had a son.

Shireen would've.

 

 

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

As is Stannis. Did Stannis ever ask punishment for being a traitor to the Targaryens?

Nope, he still was conflicted as hell. Are you claiming that Stannis is a big fat hypocrite?? Because he is. But does the fact that he is an hypocrite changes his views?? He viewed Renly as a traitor.

 

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Who knows. Like when it came to warning Robert about the danger he was in, Stannis simply never tried.

You know perfectly that no compromise could be made, both wanted the throne and neither was going to give up.

 

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

No, she also told him he would die. It is what horrifies Cressen to act.

 

She told him she saw Renly's death but also that she saw Stannis getting Renly's power if he went to  Storm's End.

But it very may be that he knew all along.

 

 

5 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

You seem to be grasping here.#

  • Stannis is told his brother will die and he will claim his army at Storm's End
  • Stannis attacks Storm's End to get Renly to come to Storm's End
  • Threatens to destroy him at Dawn
  • While everyone else is awake, planning for war, Stannis is asleep knowing there will be no battle
  • Stannis tells Mel to do the same to Penrose

Stannis knew what he was doing. Renly, like Edric, was collateral damage in his bid to be King.

No i'm not.

  • Stannis is told that his brother will die.
  • Stannis is told that if he goes to Storm's End he'll claim his army.
  • Stannis attacks Storm's End to get Renly to come there.
  • He threatens to destroy him at Dawn.

While everyone is awake planning for war, Stannis could not be awoken, not only that but he seem to recall very vividly scenes of Renly's death.  Since Meli used his shadow and Stannis was casually asleep while Renly was killed, the more likely answer is that Stannis decided to kill him shadow baby Renly to death there, he wasn't asleep because he knew there wouldn't been a battle but because he was making sure that there would no be any battle.

 

5 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

No, he did not. If he chose battle he'd be awake like his men were, like Renly and his men were.

Stannis is the only person asleep as the battle was supposed to commence. He knew what was going to happen.

"I was still abed when he died. Your Devan will tell you. He tried to wake me. Dawn was nigh and my lords were waiting, fretting. I should have been ahorse, armored. I knew Renly would attack at break of day."

Stannis knew there was going to be no battle.

Ofc he knew, he was killing Renly.

 

 

5 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Yes, he surrendered. Stannis gave no indication that he was about to surrender in his conversation with Renly. Or did I miss that?

Does that means that Stannis can't yield in battle?? What kind of reasoning is that?? Renly did not say kill my brother is he doesn't yield, he didn't say reduce my brother, he said don't do nasty stuff to my brother corpse.

 

 

5 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Valuable hostage. Stannis is not.

No, he is Renly's brother, if you are willing  to kill your own brother rather than capture him because he's not valuable, you don't aren't trouble by it, at all.

 

5 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Stannis closed the door on that by asking for battle.

We have no idea what would have happened had Stannis surrendered. But he asked for battle, his 5k against 20k. He's not likely to survive those odds.

He didn't. Renly closed that door for him.

We know that the idea was not capture him alive and it's not like it couldn't be planned to take him alive.

 

 

5 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

He's be the first pretender who was offered peace and still chose battle despite being outnumbered more than 4:1.

That maybe, the point?? No one argues that Stannis was foolish, he was,  but Renly could've tried to arranged his capture instead of going to the kill, then we would have read either if that's difficult to do in the middle of a cgaotic charge, if Stannis armour and sword made him easy to identify,i it was best killing him etc. Renly did not even bother to do none of that, he wanted Stannis death after the parley as much as Stannis wanted him death.

 

 

5 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

He accepted Stannis' threat. Stannis was the aggressor,

  • He attacked his brother's lands
  • Threatened to destroy him
  • Had him assassinated

And yet all I ever hear from some of the Stannis fans is how unfair Renly was being. Mental!

You confuse me for Stannis fan, that is insulting.

 

 

@Alyn Oakenfist

 

Quote

IF. If Robert believed him. If it was just Stannis, he more then likely wouldn't have believed it.

Because Stannis says so, But then again, "We must, we must our duty", "They have a duty towards their rightful king" etc etc. 

He could've talked to Ned, he didn't. He wanted Robert dead.

 

Quote

Well, when did you want him to start? After the Blackwater. Of course that when the war started he hired sellswords.

He started hiring sellswords the moment he left to Dragonstone... Because he knew Robert was likely a goner.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, frenin said:

 

Quote

 

Quote

 

Quote

 

Quote

 

Quote

 

Quote

 

Quote

 

Quote

 

Quote

 

Quote

 

Quote

 

Okay dude, you win. I don't have an endless amount of time to argue every point with you again and again and watch you move the goal posts again and again so you never have to concede

 

 

Edited by Bernie Mac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Okay dude, you win. I don't have an endless amount of time to argue every point with you again and again and watch you move the goal posts again and again so you never have to concede

That's funny since the only one movinng goalpost to not admit something as simple as Renly did not care about killing Stannis is you.

Edited by frenin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 2/29/2020 at 2:11 PM, frenin said:

Don't really know how they are justified, if Renly had not betrayed him we wouldn't have seen his true faceand his limits. Nor i know why the Stormlands should've been his from the beginning, their liege is Renly, not Stannis.

Yes, we did see one part of Stannis' true face and it was not that good, but Renly's true face was not good either. Renly's true face was to betray his rightful king. In Planetos that is at least almost as bad as the things Stannis has done. Stannis' actions were blood magic, sacrifice of a few people and kinslaying. Renly's actions would have led to ten or a hundred times more deaths if the Baratheon civil war would have continued.

 

First they were both in relatively neutral positions. One can say that Stannis should have been the lord of the Stormlands or the lord of Dragonstone depending on how one looks at the situation. Since everyone thinks differently on this it is probably best to consider them both neutral in power except for Stannis' position as the older brother and rightful king.

 

After that, a neutral position where the right thing by the laws of gods and men is that Stannis becomes king and Renly kneels before him, Renly decides to rebel and make himself king instead without any legitimate reason, breaking the laws of gods and men (plus also being extremely unfair on a personal level towards Stannis who saved his life during the siege of Storm's End) and willfully dragging the entire Stormlands into war where thousands of his own kingdom will die. Thus Renly is extremely clearly the bad person in this stage.

 

After that Stannis does some bad things as well, which are considered to be as bad as Renly's actions or worse by some people, but which aren't. He sacrifices a few people to R'hllor. These people are circa a hundredth of the numbers who would die in a Baratheon civil war. Then he uses blood magic and kinslaying to kill Renly. This can be seen as a very bad thing because of various reasons, but they are at war and Stannis' "cheating" method of using magic is not more unfair than Renly rebelling without a legitimate reason according to me. Stannis has now stopped the Baratheon civil war and saved thousands of lives.

 

In short: I don't think Stannis' true face is worse than Renly's true face, and Renly's true face is much worse since he did what he did because of his own irrational and faulty thoughts about being a potentially better king than Stannis. Renly did his terrible actions, which risked the deaths of thousands, from an easy position where he was in no desperation whatsoever. Stannis did his terrible actions, which killed maybe a hundred or a few hundred people, from an extremely difficult position of great desperation that he had been put in by (Robert and) Renly.

 

And yes, the Stormlands were Renly's, and one can argue back and forth about whether this should have been the case from the beginning but yes, in the eyes of the law they were legitimately Renly's. BUT Renly is the younger brother within House Baratheon and should kneel before his older brother and the rightful king of the Seven Kingdoms. And he had not been unfairly treated by Stannis in any way and therefore did not have the same reason for rebelling as for example House Stark had during Robert's Rebellion.

Edited by Adam Targaryen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2020 at 2:52 PM, Bernie Mac said:

 

He's been the only non Targ King in 300 years of rule, won two civil wars and had a pretty relaxed and prosperous (with one blip) 15 year reign.

He's deserving of more than 'some' respect. Everything his brothers have and have achieved is from his generosity and support. If Robert was never King they'd both be household knights with even bigger chips on their shoulders, much like the brothers of Rogar Baratheon.

Not sure how the realm degenerated under his rule?

As for money, this is more complicated that people seem to assume. For one Kings like Henry V, who left a full treasury, was not the norm. Most kings wasted money and left the coffers pretty low for their successors. A full treasury often meant a greedy king over taxing his subjects.

As for waste, debatable. Tourneys and feasts are good for a realms economy and prosperity. Something that is pretty important for a new dynasty. And while Littlefinger does seem to have been ripping off the crown, it should also be noted that he was putting much money back into the economy, loaning money to merchants and new business's.

 

As for the debt, there is a practical reason for that, though it will likely never be touched upon in series. New Kingdoms/dynasties that get into a debt often do so to add legitimacy to their reign. It shows that they are recognized as rulers. The founding father's of America, despite being in charge of a hugely prosperous country, needed to make debt with other nations so to be recognized as a legitimate government.

Robert's Government taking on debt from the Faith, Lannisters, Tyrells and Braavos (amongst others) was in part securing his crown.

He ruled the Stormlands for 13 years, he has sat on the Small Council for around 3 years, seems to have ruled the realm while Robert was on his long journey North, Stannis at Dragonstone and Arryn dead.

At the age of 21 he has done quite a lot for the realm. His disadvantage seems to be

  • not being old enough to command in the last two Rebellions
  • being killed by magic in the War of the Five Kings

Renly did not do that alone. Joffrey, Robb, Stannis, Tywin, Ned&Cat and Stannis all contributed to that as well.

No. He asks for evidence, Stannis does not give any.

Stannis declared after both Renly and Robb. If he wants people to believe he is the rightful King he has to offer something better than his word.

Had Stannis not stalled things may have been different, but both Renly and Robb had other men swear to them. Men who might not necessarily swear the same vows to Stannis.

Much else? Please elaborate.

We don't know that. This is a forum about book Stannis, not show Stannis.

Nothing in the books suggests that Stannis was particularly worthy as a warrior. Robert certainly was. Stannis may well have been the weakest of the three brothers in this regard.

True.

Untrue.

No, not always. His duty would have been to warn Robert that his life was in danger, that he was cuckolded.

Stannis did his duty when it benefited him.

How does he fight for the Starks?

He was willing to make Arnolf Karstark the Lord of Winterfell. That is not fighting for the Starks, that is simply putting anyone in charge of Winterfell who will serve him.

 

- All right, cheerz.

 

I agree with most or at least a lot of what you have said and the rest I think it's unnecessary to continue arguing about.

 

...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2020 at 5:06 PM, Trigger Warning said:

The guy that cries about Ned stealing the position of hand to his grieving widow in the same breath as offering his condolences? 

Okay, you are right. He has not always been respectful towards others but at least relatively often and more often than Renly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Adam Targaryen said:

Yes, we did see one part of Stannis' true face and it was not that good, but Renly's true face was not good either. Renly's true face was to betray his rightful king. In Planetos that is at least almost as bad as the things Stannis has done. Stannis' actions were blood magic, sacrifice of a few people and kinslaying. Renly's actions would have led to ten or a hundred times more deaths if the Baratheon civil war would have continued.

Hmmm Stannis did not have even 10k in his army, how could Renly's actions les to ten or a hundred times more deaths?? Is not Stannis commited to continue  the war??

 

 

43 minutes ago, Adam Targaryen said:

After that, a neutral position where the right thing by the laws of gods and men is that Stannis becomes king and Renly kneels before him, Renly decides to rebel and make himself king instead without any legitimate reason, breaking the laws of gods and men (plus also being extremely unfair on a personal level towards Stannis who saved his life during the siege of Storm's End) and willfully dragging the entire Stormlands into war where thousands of his own kingdom will die. Thus Renly is extremely clearly the bad person in this stage.

Joffrey, Tommen and Myrcella. They are in eyes of everyone, that includes Renly, Robert's trueborn kids, so Stannis is in no position  to demand anything.

Before that, Stannis has let Robert to die and had stolen his fleet. So the whole war is Stannis doing for inaction.

 

 

49 minutes ago, Adam Targaryen said:

After that Stannis does some bad things as well, which are considered to be as bad as Renly's actions or worse by some people, but which aren't. He sacrifices a few people to R'hllor. These people are circa a hundredth of the numbers who would die in a Baratheon civil war. Then he uses blood magic and kinslaying to kill Renly. This can be seen as a very bad thing because of various reasons, but they are at war and Stannis' "cheating" method of using magic is not more unfair than Renly rebelling without a legitimate reason according to me. Stannis has now stopped the Baratheon civil war and saved thousands of lives.

And how many thousands of lives Stannis spent in his quest??

He sacrifices people to his quest, he kills his brother to his quest. He sacrifices tens of thousands of lives  to his quest, he almost killed his own nephew to his quest.   It seems that the only one allowed to do that is Stannis.

 

58 minutes ago, Adam Targaryen said:

In short: I don't think Stannis' true face is worse than Renly's true face, and Renly's true face is much worse since he did what he did because of his own irrational and faulty thoughts about being a potentially better king than Stannis. Renly did his terrible actions, which risked the deaths of thousands, from an easy position where he was in no desperation whatsoever. Stannis did his terrible actions, which killed maybe a hundred or a few hundred people, from an extremely difficult position of great desperation that he had been put in by (Robert and) Renly.

Stannis killed those tens of thousands not Renly, Stannis was the one killing brothers, abandoning them or about to kill his blood, not Renly.  Neither Robert nor Renly put him in any situation. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Adam Targaryen said:

And yes, the Stormlands were Renly's, and one can argue back and forth about whether this should have been the case from the beginning but yes, in the eyes of the law they were legitimately Renly's. BUT Renly is the younger brother within House Baratheon and should kneel before his older brother and the rightful king of the Seven Kingdoms. And he had not been unfairly treated by Stannis in any way and therefore did not have the same reason for rebelling as for example House Stark had during Robert's Rebellion.

There is no arguing, Storm's End was Robert's, he needed Stannis in Dragonstone.

Renly is the younger brother, his duty is with Robert's kids not to Stannis.

And that of he was not treated unfairly by Stannis remains to be seen, Stannis resents and despise  his brother far before the war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert cause he is the best of the bunch.

Stannis is a monster and hypocrite. 

Renly I get the impression Renly is nice and handsome but that's about it.

Share this post


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

Stannis' actions were blood magic, sacrifice of a few people and kinslaying

On the blood magic stuff and the sacrifice there's no arguing, but kinslaying? Yeah attempted kinslaying sure, but Renly's death was Mel's thing.

5 hours ago, frenin said:

Before that, Stannis has let Robert to die

So has Ned. So what? Both of them let Robert die because of their own code of honor not because of scheming. Ned didn't want the children to die and Stannis didn't want the matter to be buried due to how cold his relationship with Robert was and how self-serving it would have been if he was the one to bring the news. Also after Jon Arryn he probably though the Lannisters were going to have him killed.

5 hours ago, frenin said:

So the whole war is Stannis doing for inaction.

Again the same argument could be made for Ned. Or for Jon Arryn. Or anybody else in KL who could put 2 and 2 together. Stannis doesn't share anymore blame in the whole matter then Jon Arryn or Ned Stark.

5 hours ago, frenin said:

And how many thousands of lives Stannis spent in his quest??

He sacrifices people to his quest, he kills his brother to his quest. He sacrifices tens of thousands of lives  to his quest, he almost killed his own nephew to his quest.   It seems that the only one allowed to do that is Stannis.

Again, there is no proof he had any active part in killing Renly. For all we know it was Mel's doing, all Stannis did was have sex with her. As for the human cost of war, the same thing can be said of:

  • Robert
  • Renly
  • Joffrey
  • Tywin
  • Ned Stark
  • Jon Arryn
  • Robb Stark
  • Aegon
  • Daenerys

War is hell and inevitably it has a human cost. It's not fair however to criticize Stannis, for a thing that everyone does.

5 hours ago, frenin said:

Stannis killed those tens of thousands not Renly

That's only because Renly died before he could. Or do you think Reenly would have won the Wot5K without killing tens of thousands?

5 hours ago, frenin said:

Renly is the younger brother, his duty is with Robert's kids not to Stannis.

Renly's duties were to himself apparently. I don't understand how you can argue that in terms of motivation Renly is even near Stannis. Stannis is the rightful heir of Robert Baratheon, while Renly even admits to having basically no claim.

Share this post


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

On the blood magic stuff and the sacrifice there's no arguing, but kinslaying? Yeah attempted kinslaying sure, but Renly's death was Mel's thing.

With Stannis knowledge and participation.

 

 

5 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

So has Ned. So what? Both of them let Robert die because of their own code of honor not because of scheming. Ned didn't want the children to die and Stannis didn't want the matter to be buried due to how cold his relationship with Robert was and how self-serving it would have been if he was the one to bring the news. Also after Jon Arryn he probably though the Lannisters were going to have him killed.

Comparing Ned and Stannis is ludicrous.

Ned wanted to save children, Stannis was directly aiming to Robert's death. Stannis could've talked to Ned, he could send a raven or he could've sent Davos, he could've respond to Ned's letters.

Stannis never says that he feared for his life, what he does say it's that Robert should've given him the office of Hand. He would've stayed in KL if so.

 

 

8 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Again the same argument could be made for Ned. Or for Jon Arryn. Or anybody else in KL who could put 2 and 2 together. Stannis doesn't share anymore blame in the whole matter then Jon Arryn or Ned Stark.

Hmmm ofc he does.

Jon Arryn was killed before he could bring the matter to Robert and was too weak in his deathbed. Robert was killed before Ned could tell him the truth.

Stannis "everyone must do their duty no matter how hard it is". abandoned his brother, stole his fleet, started hiring  sellswords and blocked Dragonstone while ignoring every summon from KL.

Yes, Stannis do share a lot more of blame than Ned or Jon Arryn. 

 

 

12 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Again, there is no proof he had any active part in killing Renly. For all we know it was Mel's doing, all Stannis did was have sex with her. As for the human cost of war, the same thing can be said of:

  • Robert
  • Renly
  • Joffrey
  • Tywin
  • Ned Stark
  • Jon Arryn
  • Robb Stark
  • Aegon
  • Daenerys

War is hell and inevitably it has a human cost. It's not fair however to criticize Stannis, for a thing that everyone does.

We have  gone through this before, Stannis went to KL by Meli's advice, he was specifically told by his wife that the Stormlords would be his if his baby brother were to die, he was asleep and could not be woken when Renly was being killed, he has memories of what it happened there. And he ofc repeated the trick with Penrose. So yes, there is evidence that points that Stannis involvement. There is no evidence however that Renly's murder happened without his knowledge. He very much knew and let it happen. 

 

I did not point about war casualties  @Adam Targaryen did. It seems that the new trend among Stannis fandom is pointing an imagenery bloodbath that Renly would provoke in the "Baratheon civil war" and that Stannis is some sort of hero for avoiding. That's simply :bs:.

 

 

22 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

That's only because Renly died before he could. Or do you think Reenly would have won the Wot5K without killing tens of thousands?

I think that Renly was the only one in the position  to end the war without the massive bloodbad  the Wot5k turned into, his charisma and popularity and his huge army were a perfect deterrent. 

Stannis killing Renly first leveled the game amongst the contenders  (so more blood would be spilled) and later destroyed it by the Reach joining Joffrey.

 

 

27 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Renly's duties were to himself apparently. I don't understand how you can argue that in terms of motivation Renly is even near Stannis. Stannis is the rightful heir of Robert Baratheon, while Renly even admits to having basically no claim.

Since Renly does not believe Robert's kids bastards, how can he see (or anyone) Stannis the righful King??

And both did the exact same thing to get the exact same thing, both passed over an older brother to get nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Robert, no contest, ignoring their private lives anyway. But ask yourself this, if Stannis or Renly are in danger, does Robert stand idly by or make mundane little plots with his pals? I’d Stannis it Renly get murdered does the murderer stand a hope in hell of getting away with it?
 

Stannis has earned my respect because I thought he was a twat right up until the pink letter and then I literally threw my book in anger, because why does nothing good happen!? I didn’t realise until his supposed death that I DO NOT want this character to leave my pages, I enjoy the fact that numerous bad guys have trembled at his approach, that there is a chance that Roose and Ramsay could face his wrath. I enjoy his character arc, the sense of danger that we’ll lose the man Davis respects for good, or he’ll emerge better and stronger than before, whether his path will end in redemption or he’ll go down the path straight to hell. When the story is told he could be the brother I respect the most, or the worst person in history. Provided his story is not cut short at Winterfell. Bear in mind he is at fault as anyone for the shitstorm Westeros is in, but in this shitstorm he is in danger of becoming an incredibly viable candidate. That is if you can, like me, put the Renly murder, and the Edric debacle in the past, but also like me live in constant fear for Shireen and Stannis’ own soul, too many close calls.

 

Stannis, if nothing else, for me is a page turner.

 

Edit - Renly died too soon to have much of an impact, but it’s worth remembering his war was with Cersei, and the steps he took were all about removing her, the real danger. Pretty much everything that goes wrong since can be laid at the feet of his death and his slayer, his death forced the Lannister Tyrell pact, denied Stannis his throne, put the largest army in Westeros in the hands of Tywin fucking Lannister, denied the Dornish their vengeance, denied the Starks their justice, forced the Red Wedding, got Oberyns skull crushed and more. Like I say above, Stannis is responsible for the state of things now, it’s ironic that he’s starting to look good for anyone, but there it is

Edited by FitzChivalry Fartseer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/27/2020 at 5:32 PM, frenin said:

Hmmm Stannis did not have even 10k in his army, how could Renly's actions les to ten or a hundred times more deaths?? Is not Stannis commited to continue  the war??

 

A reasonable number from what I have seen seems to be that Stannis had circa 5000-10 000 men at the time of Renly's death, so I say 7000. It is a reasonable number within those limits.

 

If Stannis' 7000 men were to fight with Renly's men, it is reasonable to suppose that each soldier on both sides kills 1 man, and then dies himself. Thus the 7000 men in Stannis' army would kill circa the equivalent of Renly's army before Renly's army had killed all of them. 7 000 Stannis soldiers and 7 000 Renly soldiers kill each other, and then the rest of Renly's huge army is left victorious.

7 000 + 7 000 = 14 000.

 

I think that Stannis killed/sacrificed 100 people or less on Dragonstone. Tell me if you think the number was larger than that. If I am right in the 100 number, the following calculation makes sense and is relevant.

 

100 X 10 = 1000.

100 X 100 = 10 000.

 

Stannis killed maybe 100 men.

Renly's act of claiming himself king and going to war against Stannis would have led to the deaths of maybe 14 000 men in the battle between Renly and Stannis.

 

14 000 is more than 10 000 and much more than 1000.

 

That is how Renly's actions would have led to 10 or 100 times more deaths than Stannis' killings.

 

...

Whether Stannis is commited to continue the war or not is an irrelevant question since the potential death of ca 14 000 Stormlanders is a consequence of Renly's first actions. Renly started it. Without Renly's act of claiming himself king over Stannis the war situation would not exist between them.

 

On 3/27/2020 at 5:32 PM, frenin said:

Joffrey, Tommen and Myrcella. They are in eyes of everyone, that includes Renly, Robert's trueborn kids, so Stannis is in no position  to demand anything.

Before that, Stannis has let Robert to die and had stolen his fleet. So the whole war is Stannis doing for inaction.

Yes, it is true that Cersei's children are considered legitimate in the eyes of "everyone". It is not necessary that Stannis should demand Renly kneeling before him instead of kneeling before Joffrey. But it is completely reasonable that Renly should kneel to Stannis if he also sees Cersei's children as being not from Robert. If Robert has no legitimate children, the next person in the line of succession is Stannis. Thus Stannis is indeed in a position to demand that Renly kneels before him if he does not kneel before Joffrey.

 

Yes, Stannis has "left Robert to die". But I don't think that it is reasonable to expect that Stannis should have seen Robert's death coming. Almost noone in Westeros (including Renly himself too) saw it coming and many of us readers did not either. Therefore Stannis can not reasonably be blamed for this more than Renly can. They were both on the small council meeting and pretty much equally close to Robert and saw what was happening around court.

 

Stannis' departure to Dragonstone, "leaving Robert" in King's Landing, can definitely be criticised in a legitimate way. It was bad of him and without any legal/legitimate reason. It was also bad of him to steal the fleet. But I don't think that these things are as bad as Renly claiming himself king. We can continue discussing this exact thing further if you want. I may change my mind, it is possible.

 

It is very possible that the war between the Lannisters and Baratheons is partly Stannis' fault. But the war between Lannister and Baratheon did not need to lead to a war between Baratheon and Baratheon. That is the point. If Lannister had battled Baratheon in the field, many men on both sides would have died. But if Renly would have lived on and made Baratheon battle Baratheon before that, it would have meant even more of the Baratheon men dying. That is very obvious.

 

Thus the first conflict (Lannister VS Baratheon) was indeed partly Stannis' fault. But very importantly Stannis had a legitimate reason: his knowledge of the illegitimacy of Cersei's children. This justifies Stannis' actions leading to the Lannister VS Baratheon war in the eyes of the law in Westeros.

 

Renly's creation of the second conflict (Baratheon VS Baratheon) is 100 % his own fault and increases the Baratheon deaths. And very importantly he has no legitimate reason to do it. He does not have justification for his actions leading to the Baratheon VS Baratheon war in the eyes of the law in Westeros.

 

On 3/27/2020 at 5:32 PM, frenin said:

And how many thousands of lives Stannis spent in his quest??

He sacrifices people to his quest, he kills his brother to his quest. He sacrifices tens of thousands of lives  to his quest, he almost killed his own nephew to his quest.   It seems that the only one allowed to do that is Stannis.

 

Stannis had not even spent one thousand lives in his quest or illegitimately (without legitimacy from the line of succession) taken the initiative to do so at the time of Renly's death. Correct me if I am wrong in this.

 

Yes, he sacrifices people to his quest. Yes, he kills his brother to his quest. Yes, he sacrifices tens of thousands of lives to his quest. Yes, he almost killed his own nephew to his quest (I assume you mean Edric Storm and not Joffrey. Correct me if I am wrong in this.).

 

It is not that the only one who is allowed to do that is Stannis. It is not so absolute. But he does have relatively reasonable reasons for doing so.

 

He sacrifices people to his quest because every king sacrifices people to his quest in war. It is not a big difference whether one gives a man to the flames (which, as we have noticed in the story, can result in actual magic powers, which means a greater chance for victory for Stannis and thus equally reasonable as sacrificing people by making them soldiers to die from similarly terrible deaths.). 

 

He kills his brother to this quest because it is the easiest way of ending the war with the least bloodshed (apart from kneeling himself before an unjustified claim). Only one death, the death of Renly, spares thousands. And regarding the brother relationship, Renly was obviously ready to kill Stannis himself, since he started the war and seemed ready to go through with it and have Stannis killed in battle. Thus Renly was ready to kill Stannis before Stannis was ready to kill Renly. It is not unjust of Stannis to give Renly what Renly had in mind for Stannis.

 

 

He does not sacrifice tens of thousands of lives in his quest at the time of Renly's death in a way that Renly has not already started.

 

He almost kills his nephew, Edric Storm, because it is an easy way of sparing the lives of many many others (including innocents) by killing only one innocent person. If you think it is bad since it is kinslaying, we can continue arguing about that. I think that the sparing of thousands makes up for one act of kinslaying, especially since they have barely even met before and have no real relationship to each other. It would have been worse if he had known Stannis for a long time and trusted him/loved him or vice versa. But they do not know each other. And very importantly, Renly is prepared for kinslaying Stannis despite Stannis not having done anything bad toward Renly. Thus Stannis' intention of killing Edric Storm is reasonable when compared to the greater situation and also not worse than Renly's initial act of rebellion which means that he is ready to commit kinslaying with Stannis.

 

On 3/27/2020 at 5:32 PM, frenin said:

Stannis killed those tens of thousands not Renly, Stannis was the one killing brothers, abandoning them or about to kill his blood, not Renly.  Neither Robert nor Renly put him in any situation. 

 

What do you mean? Which tens of thousands did Stannis kill, and how and when?

 

Yes, Stannis killed Renly. Stannis was the one actually killing his brother because he got it done (and as I explained above here, it was a good and justified thing compared to the alternative). But Renly was the one who started the lethal conflict between them. By declaring himself king over Stannis and going to war against him, Renly showed that he was willing to kill Stannis before this. Renly started it and would have killed Stannis in battle if the had the chance.

 

Yes, Stannis abandoned Robert. Read what I have said about that situation earlier above.

 

Yes, Stannis was about to kill his blood. As I have said, Renly was too. Renly was about to kill Stannis in battle. And Renly started that conflict. Stannis is not worse than Renly in this regard just because he happened to be the one who actually got it done.

 

Robert and Renly both put him in difficult situations. Robert put him in the bad position of having Dragonstone instead of Storm's End, having to marry Selyse Florent etc etc. Renly put him in the bad position of having to fight his own brother and kingdom for his legitimate kingship while being in a severely disadvantageous military and economical position.

 

On 3/27/2020 at 5:32 PM, frenin said:

There is no arguing, Storm's End was Robert's, he needed Stannis in Dragonstone.

Renly is the younger brother, his duty is with Robert's kids not to Stannis.

And that of he was not treated unfairly by Stannis remains to be seen, Stannis resents and despise  his brother far before the war.

 

There is very much arguing. The question of whether Stannis should have gotten Dragonstone or Storm's End is very complex and it is reasonable to argue about it as there are several perspectives and issues which are important and not just one clear answer to it. But precisely therefore, since it is such a complex issue, I think we should not argue about it. It would be extremely hard or impossible to say what was right and what was not in this situation. So I think it is best to leave this point neutral.

 

Renly's duty is with Robert's kids if he thinks they are legitimate. If he does not think this, which he in fact does not, his duty is then to Stannis, as the next in the line of succession over him.

 

Yes, he might have been unfairly treated by Stannis. We do not know this. But I absolutely do not think that he was so unfairly treated by Stannis that it was a reasonable excuse for rebelling against him.

Edited by Adam Targaryen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Adam Targaryen said:

Renly's duty is with Robert's kids if he thinks they are legitimate. If he does not think this, which he in fact does not, his duty is then to Stannis, as the next in the line of succession over him.

Provide literally one piece of textual evidence that Renly does not think Robert's children are legitimate. 

“So be it. Stannis was never the most cherished of brothers, I confess. Do you suppose this tale of his is true? If Joffrey is the Kingslayer’s get—” “—your brother is the lawful heir.” “While he lives,” Renly admitted. "
 

Why would GRRM put this little musing of Renly's into the narrative if he knew Joffrey was a bastard, it makes no sense. He has nothing to gain by putting on a show for Catelyn and even more importantly he'd be an idiot not to declare it when he claimed the throne. Usurping 3 bastards and one uncle nobody likes is a lot easier than usurping 3 legitimate children. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Adam Targaryen said:

A reasonable number from what I have seen seems to be that Stannis had circa 5000-10 000 men at the time of Renly's death, so I say 7000. It is a reasonable number within those limits.

He had 5k.

I'll call them five thousand and be generous, codfish lords and onion knights and sellswords. Half of them are like to come over to me before the battle starts. You have fewer than four hundred horse, my scouts tell me—freeriders in boiled leather who will not stand an instant against armored lances

After he has Renly assassinated he had 20k

"Do you take me for an utter fool, ser?" asked Stannis. "I have twenty thousand men. You are besieged by land and sea. Why would I choose single combat when my eventual victory is certain?"

The majority of which were from Renly's host.

A fifth of Renly's knights departed with Ser Loras rather than bend the knee to Stannis

 

I genuinely don't know where you are getting 10 or 7k from, it seems to 5k or under.

 

Quote

 

If Stannis' 7000 men were to fight with Renly's men, it is reasonable to suppose that each soldier on both sides kills 1 man, and then dies himself.

Well first of all, there is no 7k. But even then, that is just dumb for multiple reasons.

  • Renly's 20k were knights, all but 400 of Stannis' men were foot. A knight will constantly be more effective in battle than a free rider in boiled leather
  • Renly's is the chivalry of the Reach, his best trained and best equipped troops. They are not the same quality, in general, of troops on either side.
  • Numbers never work like that in battle. Even with the assumption that all the soldiers were of the same quality in terms of training and equipment that would still not mean both sides would have an equal amount of casualties 4:1 is going to see far, far fewer casualties for the 4.

Genuinely not sure if you are trolling right now or just awful with numbers and/or understanding battle. I may wait for more responses from you on this topic to reply to the rest of your post.

 

Edited by Bernie Mac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Adam Targaryen said:

A reasonable number from what I have seen seems to be that Stannis had circa 5000-10 000 men at the time of Renly's death, so I say 7000. It is a reasonable number within those limits.

  

If Stannis' 7000 men were to fight with Renly's men, it is reasonable to suppose that each soldier on both sides kills 1 man, and then dies himself. Thus the 7000 men in Stannis' army would kill circa the equivalent of Renly's army before Renly's army had killed all of them. 7 000 Stannis soldiers and 7 000 Renly soldiers kill each other, and then the rest of Renly's huge army is left victorious.

7 000 + 7 000 = 14 000.

 

I think that Stannis killed/sacrificed 100 people or less on Dragonstone. Tell me if you think the number was larger than that. If I am right in the 100 number, the following calculation makes sense and is relevant.

 

100 X 10 = 1000.

100 X 100 = 10 000.

 

Stannis killed maybe 100 men.

Renly's act of claiming himself king and going to war against Stannis would have led to the deaths of maybe 14 000 men in the battle between Renly and Stannis.

 

14 000 is more than 10 000 and much more than 1000.

 

That is how Renly's actions would have led to 10 or 100 times more deaths than Stannis' killings.

 

...

Whether Stannis is commited to continue the war or not is an irrelevant question since the potential death of ca 14 000 Stormlanders is a consequence of Renly's first actions. Renly started it. Without Renly's act of claiming himself king over Stannis the war situation would not exist between them.

Your claim does not make sense, Stannis forces were in considerably poorer condition and they also had Storm's End at the back. Nor Stannis's men would fight till the last man.

 

Stannis was the one who started the fight, he wanted Renly's army, Renly was not about to give them any and that would not have changed had Renly not crowned himself, he went to kill Renly for that. And ofc it's relevant to the question, Stannis was the one startingthe fight, Stannis was the one dragging the war to its bloodiest phase, had Renly not been killed tens of thousands of lives would've bees spared.

 

26 minutes ago, Adam Targaryen said:

Yes, it is true that Cersei's children are considered legitimate in the eyes of "everyone". It is not necessary that Stannis should demand Renly kneeling before him instead of kneeling before Joffrey. But it is completely reasonable that Renly should kneel to Stannis if he also sees Cersei's children as being not from Robert. If Robert has no legitimate children, the next person in the line of succession is Stannis. Thus Stannis is indeed in a position to demand that Renly kneels before him if he does not kneel before Joffrey.

What kind of logic is that?? Renly did see Cersei's kids as legit, he just didn't care, the very fact that Renly sees those kids as legit completely erases any argument from Stannis in his pov, Stannis simply has no right to take the Throne and as him he is taking it because he feels like it, Renly owes Stannis zero in said situation.  Paraphrasing Robb "That makes him [Joffrey] evil, I do not know that it makes Renly king. Joffrey is still Robert's eldest trueborn son, so the throne is rightfully his by all the laws of the realm."

It's unreasonably and completely ludicrous that Stannis demands nothing to Renly without any kind of proof.

 

34 minutes ago, Adam Targaryen said:

Yes, Stannis has "left Robert to die". But I don't think that it is reasonable to expect that Stannis should have seen Robert's death coming. Almost noone in Westeros (including Renly himself too) saw it coming and many of us readers did not either. Therefore Stannis can not reasonably be blamed for this more than Renly can. They were both on the small council meeting and pretty much equally close to Robert and saw what was happening around court.

Almostno one in Westeros had any reason to believe that Robert was going to die any time soon, Stannis had more than reasons to believe it, he left both his brothers on their own completely unaaware of the danger they were in.  Renly did not know about the twincest, Stannid did know about it, trying to share the blame is simply absurd. If your father knows you're about to be killed and shuts his mouth and flees and your mother does not know nothing and stays, you can't legitimately say that both of them are responsible for your fate, one knew and chose to abandon you, the other was as in the dark as you were.

Stannis ofc that sees Robert's death coming, he believes that the Lannisters had killed old Jon and he prepares himsel for Robert's death.

 

41 minutes ago, Adam Targaryen said:

Stannis' departure to Dragonstone, "leaving Robert" in King's Landing, can definitely be criticised in a legitimate way. It was bad of him and without any legal/legitimate reason. It was also bad of him to steal the fleet. But I don't think that these things are as bad as Renly claiming himself king. We can continue discussing this exact thing further if you want. I may change my mind, it is possible.

These things are the reason behind Renly's crowning and the whole War of the 5 Kings, behind Ned's murder, behind old Jon's murder and behind Bran's crippling. Literally none of the subsequent political and magical  events in the whole Planetos (from Robert's death, to Dany's dragons and the meerenese knot) would be the same had Stannis opened his mouth, Stannis wanted to be King however, the only way of achieving "rightfully" was if Robert were to die without trueborn kids, and Stannis made sure of just  that by shutting his mouth.

That without the fact that Stannis betrayed his own brother, the one bitching about Renly. 

 

 

48 minutes ago, Adam Targaryen said:

It is very possible that the war between the Lannisters and Baratheons is partly Stannis' fault. But the war between Lannister and Baratheon did not need to lead to a war between Baratheon and Baratheon. That is the point. If Lannister had battled Baratheon in the field, many men on both sides would have died. But if Renly would have lived on and made Baratheon battle Baratheon before that, it would have meant even more of the Baratheon men dying. That is very obvious.

The war between Lannister and Baratheon leads to a war between Baratheons because Renly, even when he was also driven by ambition, see crowning himself as his only way out and believes, rightfully so, that Stannis could never get the job because people simply dislike him. Stannis killed more Baratheon men in the Blackwater than Renly could've ever at Storm's End, that is very obvious.

 

 

52 minutes ago, Adam Targaryen said:

Thus the first conflict (Lannister VS Baratheon) was indeed partly Stannis' fault. But very importantly Stannis had a legitimate reason: his knowledge of the illegitimacy of Cersei's children. This justifies Stannis' actions leading to the Lannister VS Baratheon war in the eyes of the law in Westeros.

 

Renly's creation of the second conflict (Baratheon VS Baratheon) is 100 % his own fault and increases the Baratheon deaths. And very importantly he has no legitimate reason to do it. He does not have justification for his actions leading to the Baratheon VS Baratheon war in the eyes of the law in Westeros.

Ofc Stannis had no reason of doing it, he himself chose to fuel the conflict by remaining silent.

 

No, the Second conflict is not Renly's fault, it's more Stannis's actually. Renly crowns himself out of survival sense, Stannis wants Renly's army, he kills Renly. Had Renly not crowned himself, Stannis would have wanted Renly's army and he would've still killed Renly to get said army. It's simply hugely hypocrite to accuse Renly for that while the reason there is a conflict in the first place is Stannis actions, the reason why you keep saying that Stannis's actions are "legitimate" is because he let Robert die for it.

 

 

56 minutes ago, Adam Targaryen said:

Stannis had not even spent one thousand lives in his quest or illegitimately (without legitimacy from the line of succession) taken the initiative to do so at the time of Renly's death. Correct me if I am wrong in this.

How many people do you think died at the Blackwater?? How many people are dying in the North???

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Adam Targaryen said:

He sacrifices people to his quest because every king sacrifices people to his quest in war. It is not a big difference whether one gives a man to the flames (which, as we have noticed in the story, can result in actual magic powers, which means a greater chance for victory for Stannis and thus equally reasonable as sacrificing people by making them soldiers to die from similarly terrible deaths.). 

It is a big difference, like killling an enemy in war and a war prisoner. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Adam Targaryen said:

He kills his brother to this quest because it is the easiest way of ending the war with the least bloodshed (apart from kneeling himself before an unjustified claim). Only one death, the death of Renly, spares thousands. And regarding the brother relationship, Renly was obviously ready to kill Stannis himself, since he started the war and seemed ready to go through with it and have Stannis killed in battle. Thus Renly was ready to kill Stannis before Stannis was ready to kill Renly. It is not unjust of Stannis to give Renly what Renly had in mind for Stannis.

  1. He doesn't give a single damn about ending the war with least bloodshed, he never makes that a reason, it does not make sense to grant him that reason and had he truly cared about that he would've told the twincest earlier and not when there was a war with no return going on. 
  2. Renly was obviously ready to kill Stannis because Stannis both attacked his home and threatened to kill him.
  3. Renly had no intention of killing Stannis before Stannis attacked him, he believed that Stannis would help him to get the throne and he offered him Storm's End to patch thinngs up.

 

 

1 hour ago, Adam Targaryen said:

He does not sacrifice tens of thousands of lives in his quest at the time of Renly's death in a way that Renly has not already started.

Renly planned to end the war with the least bloodshed, Stannis spent thousands of lives in his failure at the Blackwater, how is that Renly's fault??

 

 

1 hour ago, Adam Targaryen said:

He almost kills his nephew, Edric Storm, because it is an easy way of sparing the lives of many many others (including innocents) by killing only one innocent person. If you think it is bad since it is kinslaying, we can continue arguing about that. I think that the sparing of thousands makes up for one act of kinslaying, especially since they have barely even met before and have no real relationship to each other. It would have been worse if he had known Stannis for a long time and trusted him/loved him or vice versa. But they do not know each other. And very importantly, Renly is prepared for kinslaying Stannis despite Stannis not having done anything bad toward Renly. Thus Stannis' intention of killing Edric Storm is reasonable when compared to the greater situation and also not worse than Renly's initial act of rebellion which means that he is ready to commit kinslaying with Stannis.

 

I can't with the double standards, everything Stannis does is an easy way to spare the lives of many many others... Which would've been repulsive even if that were the true, it wasn't.

(1) Stannis's only purpose behind killing Edric is actually ending the lives of many many others, since his only purpose behind that is awake dragons that would make him win the throne and destroy his many many enemies. 

(2) The fact that they did not have met before makes Edric any less his nephew?? Stannis did know and sort of loved Cersei's kids, that did not restrain him for wanting their deads now.

(3) Stop using Renly for trying to clean Stannis's messes, sometime along the way  you should start realizing that Stannis is a grown man and can't be defended with "yes but look at the other". 

(4) Renly was prepared to kinslay Stannis because Stannis had attacked Storm's End and threatened with killing him.

 

 

1 hour ago, Adam Targaryen said:

Yes, Stannis killed Renly. Stannis was the one actually killing his brother because he got it done (and as I explained above here, it was a good and justified thing compared to the alternative). But Renly was the one who started the lethal conflict between them. By declaring himself king over Stannis and going to war against him, Renly showed that he was willing to kill Stannis before this. Renly started it and would have killed Stannis in battle if the had the chance.

It was neither good nor justified thing, we see how it gets, Renly's death it's one of the main reasons for the chaos Westeros is at right now, the other reason is Tywin's death.

Renly did not start anything, a lie told a thousand times does not make it any less lie, Renly did nt go to war against him, Stannis was the one attacking Renly.

 

 

1 hour ago, Adam Targaryen said:

Robert and Renly both put him in difficult situations. Robert put him in the bad position of having Dragonstone instead of Storm's End, having to marry Selyse Florent etc etc. Renly put him in the bad position of having to fight his own brother and kingdom for his legitimate kingship while being in a severely disadvantageous military and economical position.

Why would Robert and Renly expect or even want to give Stannis any advantage to take the Throne by force?? Robert was not deciding whose brother got the better chanceto kill each other when he made his mind. Stannis wanted to fight his own brother because Stannis coveted his own's brother army.

 

1 hour ago, Adam Targaryen said:

There is very much arguing. The question of whether Stannis should have gotten Dragonstone or Storm's End is very complex and it is reasonable to argue about it as there are several perspectives and issues which are important and not just one clear answer to it. But precisely therefore, since it is such a complex issue, I think we should not argue about it. It would be extremely hard or impossible to say what was right and what was not in this situation. So I think it is best to leave this point neutral.

There is not complex arguing. Those keeps were Robert's as were Robert's decision to grant them to his brothers instead of just naming them castellans for his sons. Robert was in no way obligated to giveanything to his brothers or to follow any specifical order, which is at the end a random order. 

 

1 hour ago, Adam Targaryen said:

Renly's duty is with Robert's kids if he thinks they are legitimate. If he does not think this, which he in fact does not, his duty is then to Stannis, as the next in the line of succession over him.

(1) Renly thinks Robert's kids legit.

(2) Him thinking of Robert's kids legit makes Stannis a usuper in his eyes, he has zero duties tiwards him.

 

1 hour ago, Adam Targaryen said:

Yes, he might have been unfairly treated by Stannis. We do not know this. But I absolutely do not think that he was so unfairly treated by Stannis that it was a reasonable excuse for rebelling against him.

For the billionth time, Renly did not rebel against him. Stannis commited treason against his brother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Trigger Warning said:

Provide literally one piece of textual evidence that Renly does not think Robert's children are legitimate. 

“So be it. Stannis was never the most cherished of brothers, I confess. Do you suppose this tale of his is true? If Joffrey is the Kingslayer’s get—” “—your brother is the lawful heir.” “While he lives,” Renly admitted. "
 

Why would GRRM put this little musing of Renly's into the narrative if he knew Joffrey was a bastard, it makes no sense. He has nothing to gain by putting on a show for Catelyn and even more importantly he'd be an idiot not to declare it when he claimed the throne. Usurping 3 bastards and one uncle nobody likes is a lot easier than usurping 3 legitimate children. 

Okay, you are completely right. I did not remember that.

Share this post


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

He had 5k.

I'll call them five thousand and be generous, codfish lords and onion knights and sellswords. Half of them are like to come over to me before the battle starts. You have fewer than four hundred horse, my scouts tell me—freeriders in boiled leather who will not stand an instant against armored lances

After he has Renly assassinated he had 20k

"Do you take me for an utter fool, ser?" asked Stannis. "I have twenty thousand men. You are besieged by land and sea. Why would I choose single combat when my eventual victory is certain?"

The majority of which were from Renly's host.

A fifth of Renly's knights departed with Ser Loras rather than bend the knee to Stannis

 

I genuinely don't know where you are getting 10 or 7k from, it seems to 5k or under.

 

Well first of all, there is no 7k. But even then, that is just dumb for multiple reasons.

  • Renly's 20k were knights, all but 400 of Stannis' men were foot. A knight will constantly be more effective in battle than a free rider in boiled leather
  • Renly's is the chivalry of the Reach, his best trained and best equipped troops. They are not the same quality, in general, of troops on either side.
  • Numbers never work like that in battle. Even with the assumption that all the soldiers were of the same quality in terms of training and equipment that would still not mean both sides would have an equal amount of casualties 4:1 is going to see far, far fewer casualties for the 4.

Genuinely not sure if you are trolling right now or just awful with numbers and/or understanding battle. I may wait for more responses from you on this topic to reply to the rest of your post.

 

I am neither of the two. I will, however, admit to being only half-decent and therefory half faulty with numbers in this specific case. I did a quick google search to find Stannis' army numbers and on some pages it was estimated at 5000-10 000. It is very possible that you are right and Stannis only had 5000 at the most.

 

And you are right regarding Renly's warriors being better equipped and trained.

 

So it would probably be less than 14 000 deaths. Maybe half of that. 7 000. If all of Stannis' men die but they kill 2000 men. 

 

 

Thus it could still be circa 10 times more men than Stannis has killed on Dragonstone, which I think is less than 100.

 

We can continue arguing about the exact numbers of how many would have died in the Baratheon VS Baratheon battle, but it was several thousands in any case.

 

The point is that Renly was willing to go through with these thousands of deaths, and those deaths, even if they are just 7000 or even if they would be 1000, are a much larger number than the amount of people Stannis had killed at Dragonstone up to that point in the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...