dsjj251 Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 16 hours ago, frenin said: The rebels were not going to put any Targ in power, the rebels were settling with the next best thing. With these facts you can make your mind. It's irrelevant how removed Robert or his brothers are, since no Targ is sitting on the Throne if the rebels can avoid it. Again, a blood argument is a Targaryen argument Quote Deciding= Most important. The author does not say there was a debate, the fact that Robert would be ok following Ned or Ned does not mean the rest of the rebels would, or even Jon Arryn and Ned would find it acceptable. And Robert is talking in hindsight. Maybe but since House Baratheon was still alive it make no sense removing them, we're not talking about an scenario where all the Baratheon bros are dead. Robert had 3 Lords in his own region not follow him, Jon Arryn the same in his region in Gulltown, the Greyjoys rebelled. Who ever would have been named leader would have faced that prospect, it didnt matter. Quote You're goalposting too much here, what the greens feelings had to do with anything?? Because you were arguing that Aegon III was a hostage when in reality, he was the heir to Aegon II. He wasnt in danger of being killed. Quote Donal Noye lost his arm during one of those fights. The "Mace was just chilling there" is just fancanon with no basis actually, Martin himself has pretty much said that. No, what you just said is fan canon, because Martin has not "pretty much said so". LOL. There is basically 2 pages in the entire series dedicated to the Siege of Storms end, neither mention an attempt to bring down the walls of Storm's End or storm them at all. Noye losing his arm could be the consequence of a million different scenarios. What we do know however is that there werent that many people in Storms End and an army camped out outside of its walls for months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Drunkard Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 No one would cheat if they were married to Stannis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenin Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 3 hours ago, dsjj251 said: Again, a blood argument is a Targaryen argument Tell that to the rebels... Who would not put a Targ in the Throne, I don't understand why are you having a hard time with this. House Targaryen wasn't an option, so they were a non factor. 3 hours ago, dsjj251 said: Robert had 3 Lords in his own region not follow him, Jon Arryn the same in his region in Gulltown, the Greyjoys rebelled. Who ever would have been named leader would have faced that prospect, it didnt matter. What are you even talking about?? We are talking about crowning and reigning, it mattered a great deal to the rebels, which is why Robert was chosen... Because of his blood. 3 hours ago, dsjj251 said: Because you were arguing that Aegon III was a hostage when in reality, he was the heir to Aegon II. He wasnt in danger of being killed. Did you even read F&B?? Are you serious?? How could he not be in danger of being killed?? 3 hours ago, dsjj251 said: No, what you just said is fan canon, because Martin has not "pretty much said so". LOL. There is basically 2 pages in the entire series dedicated to the Siege of Storms end, neither mention an attempt to bring down the walls of Storm's End or storm them at all. Noye losing his arm could be the consequence of a million different scenarios. What we do know however is that there werent that many people in Storms End and an army camped out outside of its walls for months. No, Martin has said that the Siege of Storm's End was indeed important and the Tyrells were not chilling when he was outright questioned about that. The idea that Tyrell could've taken the Castle at any time is simply nonsense, not to say something stronger, that completely ignores the position of the castle, it's defenses and the fact that it's almost untakable. You don't need many people to defend a castle, in most of the most formidable castles, 200-300 can last easily years. Had Stannis had food, he could've held out forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frey family reunion Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 On 3/14/2020 at 7:03 AM, frenin said: She'd def try. Never understood why Jon Arryn did not marry Stannis to Cersei and Robert to a Hightower, those matches were so poorly made, especially Stannis's. @The Map Guy @dsjj251 As far as we can tell, the decision over who and why should be the next King was made having in count blood ties with the Targs. It's highly unlikely that Tywin would have consented to marrying Cersei to Stannis, the younger brother. Arryn was trying to cobble together a kingdom. Just defeating the Targaryens isn't really enough to do it. He has to secure alliances to make solidify the kingdom. The Lannisters were wealthy and powerful, they were probably the last piece to the puzzle to secure a new unified kingdom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenin Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 24 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said: It's highly unlikely that Tywin would have consented to marrying Cersei to Stannis, the younger brother. Arryn was trying to cobble together a kingdom. Just defeating the Targaryens isn't really enough to do it. He has to secure alliances to make solidify the kingdom. The Lannisters were wealthy and powerful, they were probably the last piece to the puzzle to secure a new unified kingdom. And why would they reject it?? If Robert was not available Stannis was the next best option. The Lannisters were trying to be on Robert's camp, I have a hard time seeing them rejecting. Stannis is Robert's heir and a hero of the campaign and soon enough, one of the most highlords in the Realm. After they little theater in KL, they'd need desperately powerful allies to not be isolated and the only ones who actually fit in the bill that we know of are Stannis, Robert, Oberyn or Euron. Most of the highlords of the time were dead, the rest were already married and the new heirs to the Great Houses were still toddlers. The Lannisters wouldn't really have much more options. Tywin was content enough to marry Cersei to Viserys if he could not have Rhaegar, I don't know why it should be different this time. All in all, Stannis match was very poorly made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frey family reunion Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 6 minutes ago, frenin said: And why would they reject it?? If Robert was not available Stannis was the next best option. The Lannisters were trying to be on Robert's camp, I have a hard time seeing them rejecting. Stannis is Robert's heir and a hero of the campaign and soon enough, one of the most highlords in the Realm. After they little theater in KL, they'd need desperately powerful allies to not be isolated and the only ones who actually fit in the bill that we know of are Stannis, Robert, Oberyn or Euron. Most of the highlords of the time were dead, the rest were already married and the new heirs to the Great Houses were still toddlers. The Lannisters wouldn't really have much more options. Because Arryn's position wasn't as strong as you assume. The most powerful region in the land was the Reach, by far. The richest region in the land were the Westerlands. You still had a very antagonistic Dorn in the south. Reach -Westerland union would have possibly been stronger than the rebel alliance cobbled together by Arryn. The crownlands were still enemy territory, the Riverlands were highly fractured in their loyalty and they were never a terribly unified region anyway (the Tully's probably having the weakest hold on their region of any of the other major families), and the North was too remote, and sparse. Bringing the Lannisters on board would isolate the Reach and quicken their submission. Tywin's slaughter of Rhaegar's children was his notion of an olive branch, that he was willing to join in this new kingdom. For the good of the realm, Arryn had to jump on this opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenin Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 24 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said: Because Arryn's position wasn't as strong as you assume. The most powerful region in the land was the Reach, by far. The richest region in the land were the Westerlands. You still had a very antagonistic Dorn in the south. Reach -Westerland union would have possibly been stronger than the rebel alliance cobbled together by Arryn. Never said that his position was secure. Doubtful that the Reach- Westerland union could've been stronger than the Stab alliance. Nevermind because all the armies were spent and the Reach were not in the mood of keep fighting. But more importantly, why would the Reach and the Westerlands ally?? 24 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said: The crownlands were still enemy territory, the Riverlands were highly fractured in their loyalty and they were never a terribly unified region anyway (the Tully's probably having the weakest hold on their region of any of the other major families), and the North was too remote, and sparse. Bringing the Lannisters on board would isolate the Reach and quicken their submission. And yet the Reach submited without any of that. As soon as Ned got to Storm's End. 24 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said: Tywin's slaughter of Rhaegar's children was his notion of an olive branch, that he was willing to join in this new kingdom. For the good of the realm, Arryn had to jump on this opportunity. No, Tywin slaughter of Rhaegar's children was a prove, as he himself said it, that he was without doubt in the Baratheon camp. Tywin has no good reason to reject Stannis, nor he is in a particularly good position. And Great Houses settled for younger princes all the time, Tywin himself was ready to marry Cersei to Viserys. But the Hightowers, the Velaryons, the Baratheons, Arryns, Lannisters, Tully, Tyrell and Redwyne were all happy with doing it. Tywin sought to marry into the royal family, with the King or the heir if posible if not with the next best option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Back in Black-Snow Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 22 hours ago, frenin said: Tywin sought to marry into the royal family, with the King or the heir if posible if not with the next best option. Which is why he gave the order to murder Elia and children, in my opinion. Revenge, if you will, and he used it to appear as if he were completely loyal to Robert Baratheon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsjj251 Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 On 3/20/2020 at 4:41 AM, frenin said: Tell that to the rebels... Who would not put a Targ in the Throne, I don't understand why are you having a hard time with this. House Targaryen wasn't an option, so they were a non factor. Robert is a Targaryen. Again, he is 4th in line to the throne, no further removed than Laenor was. Quote What are you even talking about?? We are talking about crowning and reigning, it mattered a great deal to the rebels, which is why Robert was chosen... Because of his blood. We dont disagree. Im simply saying that there is a 3 part formula. , Stannis would only have 1 of the 3 parts. Quote Did you even read F&B?? Are you serious?? How could he not be in danger of being killed?? Fire and Blood was written in 3rd Person. Thats key. We knew Aegon 2 was willing to kill Aegon 3, but the Blacks did not. In their eyes, Aegon 3 was not just Rhaenyra's rightful heir, he was Aegon 2's as well, affirmed by the Greens own view that men must inherit before a women. Quote No, Martin has said that the Siege of Storm's End was indeed important and the Tyrells were not chilling when he was outright questioned about that. The idea that Tyrell could've taken the Castle at any time is simply nonsense, not to say something stronger, that completely ignores the position of the castle, it's defenses and the fact that it's almost untakable. You don't need many people to defend a castle, in most of the most formidable castles, 200-300 can last easily years. Had Stannis had food, he could've held out forever. Can you actually quote where he said that ? This site has a data base of his saying on the book signing trail and so on, and i have seen no such thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenin Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 48 minutes ago, dsjj251 said: Robert is a Targaryen. Again, he is 4th in line to the throne, no further removed than Laenor was. His last name says otherwise. And Laenor would not have been put in the Throne except for war either. 48 minutes ago, dsjj251 said: We dont disagree. Im simply saying that there is a 3 part formula. , Stannis would only have 1 of the 3 parts. But it's the part the rebels actually need to have some sort of legitimacy. 48 minutes ago, dsjj251 said: Can you actually quote where he said that ? This site has a data base of his saying on the book signing trail and so on, and i have seen no such thing. I'm on the phone right now so... https://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/1043/ Quote Why did mighty lords of Mace Tyrell and Paxter Redwyne's calibre waste their time and efforts in besieging an untested young lord with (apparently) only a few thousand men (and those weakened more and more of hunger to boot)? Meanwhile their overlord were losing the war? The Targaryens had lost a number of battles (and had also won some), but they weren't really losing the war until the Trident and the Sack of King's Landing. And then it was lost. And sieges were a crucial part of medieval warfare. Storm's End was not geographically strategic, but it was the base of Robert's power, as important to House Baratheon as Winterfell was to the Starks. If it had fallen, Robert would have lost his home and his lands... and two of his brothers would have been hostages in enemy hands. All important chips. Also the fall of Storm's End might have convinced many of the storm lords supporting him that the time had come to bend the knee. So the castle was hardly unimportant. Quote The other possibility is that Mace Tyrell thought it a good idea if Mad King Aerys died, but would not take the chance of actively moving against him. Instead, he stayed put at Storm's End, still appearing for the world to be on Aerys' side, while silently hoping for his death. When Ned appeared, he dipped his banners quickly enough. When Ned appeared, Aerys, Rhaegar, and Aegon were dead, and Viserys fled. There was no one left to fight for, and the war was clearly lost anyway. The modern concept of "total war" really didn't exist in the medieval period. Armies were personal, as were loyalties. The leader who wanted to fight on till the last drop of blood might well have found himself fighting on alone, since his vassals were likely to have better sense, and their levies were more likely to follow their own lord than the "general." Tyrell's surrender was pretty much warfare as usual. If he had =tried= to give battle to Ned in a lost cause, he might well have found his more opportunistic bannermen deserting to the other side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsjj251 Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 4 hours ago, frenin said: His last name says otherwise. And Laenor would not have been put in the Throne except for war either. Last names mean nothing, the blood line was the argument. 3 generations in has the same amount of DNA(technically anyways) no matter if its through the male line or female line . Quote But it's the part the rebels actually need to have some sort of legitimacy. The rebels had rebelled long before Robert declared, Quote I'm on the phone right now so... Nothing in that quote mentions unsuccessful attacks on Storms End or that the walls were impenetrable. All it mentions is what I said all along. Not sure why you decided to prove my point for me , but im cool with it , LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenin Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 9 hours ago, dsjj251 said: Last names mean nothing, the blood line was the argument. 3 generations in has the same amount of DNA(technically anyways) no matter if its through the male line or female line . And the bloodline is irrelevant in a context where no Targ would be allowed by the rebels. Last names mean something, that's the reason why the Targs were ousted, for their last names. 15 hours ago, dsjj251 said: Fire and Blood was written in 3rd Person. Thats key. We knew Aegon 2 was willing to kill Aegon 3, but the Blacks did not. In their eyes, Aegon 3 was not just Rhaenyra's rightful heir, he was Aegon 2's as well, affirmed by the Greens own view that men must inherit before a women. The Blacks did not even know that Aegon 3 was even the heir, since that was not made public. Nor they cared, neithey the Greens. Your argument is simply nonsense, Aegon was his uncle hostage and that at any rate deterred the Blacks, the rebels only need a cause to keep fighting. 9 hours ago, dsjj251 said: The rebels had rebelled long before Robert declared, But they weren't aiming to the Throne before that. 9 hours ago, dsjj251 said: Nothing in that quote mentions unsuccessful attacks on Storms End or that the walls were impenetrable. All it mentions is what I said all along. Not sure why you decided to prove my point for me , but im cool with it , LOL ????? Are you even reading what it's said You keep goalposting time after time. On 3/20/2020 at 10:41 AM, frenin said: No, Martin has said that the Siege of Storm's End was indeed important and the Tyrells were not chilling when he was outright questioned about that. This is what i said about Martin's words. The Tyrells were not chilling, no one believes so in universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsjj251 Posted March 24, 2020 Share Posted March 24, 2020 14 hours ago, frenin said: And the bloodline is irrelevant in a context where no Targ would be allowed by the rebels. Last names mean something, that's the reason why the Targs were ousted, for their last names. We simply disagree Quote The Blacks did not even know that Aegon 3 was even the heir, since that was not made public. Nor they cared, neithey the Greens. Your argument is simply nonsense, Aegon was his uncle hostage and that at any rate deterred the Blacks, the rebels only need a cause to keep fighting. I have the book on audio, so excuse me for not being able to quote it all , but"The time for hiding is done" Aegon let ravens fly from Dragonstone that Rhaenyra was dead and that he had Aegon III and Baela. So they absolutely knew. Quote But they weren't aiming to the Throne before that. They were certainly aiming for a dead Rhaegar and Aerys though. Quote ????? Are you even reading what it's said You keep goalposting time after time. There is no goal post moving on my part. You have reworded your own original statement a couple of times so let me be blunt. Your objective was to find evidence of a failed taking of the castle. You have provided no evidence of such. Instead, you are arguing semantics about what "chilling" means. I am clearly using the term to mean they are not actively taking the castle, which your own quote backs up by saying that is a strategic move by Mace in case Robert wins and you dont want to piss off the new king, or he dies and you now have the new lord trapped. You seem to believe im saying "chilling" means they are laying in the grass. Quote This is what i said about Martin's words. The Tyrells were not chilling, no one believes so in universe. Martin says they are blockading Storm's End in the hopes that if Robert dies, they control his heir, or if he lives, they havent killed his heirs and made him vengeful. Neither of us disagree on this statement, where we disagree is if there is ever a major attempt to breach the castle being blockaded. As I said, your quote never once mentions one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenin Posted March 27, 2020 Share Posted March 27, 2020 On 3/24/2020 at 9:25 AM, dsjj251 said: I have the book on audio, so excuse me for not being able to quote it all , but"The time for hiding is done" Aegon let ravens fly from Dragonstone that Rhaenyra was dead and that he had Aegon III and Baela. So they absolutely knew. They did not know however that Aegon 3 was his heir, they knew he was his hostage, that did not stopped the blacks. On 3/24/2020 at 9:25 AM, dsjj251 said: There is no goal post moving on my part. You have reworded your own original statement a couple of times so let me be blunt. Your objective was to find evidence of a failed taking of the castle. You have provided no evidence of such. Instead, you are arguing semantics about what "chilling" means. I am clearly using the term to mean they are not actively taking the castle, which your own quote backs up by saying that is a strategic move by Mace in case Robert wins and you dont want to piss off the new king, or he dies and you now have the new lord trapped. You seem to believe im saying "chilling" means they are laying in the grass. But they were actively taking the castle, what do you think a siege means?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsjj251 Posted March 28, 2020 Share Posted March 28, 2020 23 hours ago, frenin said: They did not know however that Aegon 3 was his heir, they knew he was his hostage, that did not stopped the blacks. Again, logic dictates he was the heir at that very moment seeing as he was the last living male Targaryen. Mind you, We are also told that Aegon meets Sea Snake's demands with the plans to kill him later, which means it is public knowledge at least to Driftmark and High Tide. Quote But they were actively taking the castle You keep assuming this, but there is no line in the books ever showing it, while multiple chapters talk about the Reach Army camping out at Storms End. Quote , what do you think a siege means?? The technical definition of a siege is Quote a military operation in which enemy forces surround a town or building, cutting off essential supplies, with the aim of compelling the surrender of those inside. So no, a siege in no way means they are actively attacking the castle, it literally means they can just be camped outside the walls and asking for surrender while cutting off supply lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endymion I Targaryen Posted March 28, 2020 Share Posted March 28, 2020 If Robert dies and if Stannis is crowned and not one of the major leaders of the rebellion (Ned, Jon) and if he marries Cersei, I still think it is an unhappy wedding and she would find a lover but still better than Robert - Cersei. Stannis will not abuse her or drink or cheat so no such wounds is Cersei's pride. I see her first son to be really a Baratheon. Jaime would be probably executed/join the NW for killing Aerys so her lover is not Jaime. I also doubt Stannis would accept marrying Cersei at all (the daughter of the murderer of children). Janna Tyrell or a Florent or a Hightower seem possible matches too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.