Alyn Oakenfist Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 So I know this will draw the ire of the Stark fanboys, but think about it. To recap: - He waltzes in after the lads have already ended the war and starts acting like the big dick despite doing fuck all. - He plans to continue the war and the bloodshed, and for what? Aegon II is dead, the war of succession is over, everyone agrees Aegon III is the legitimate ruler. His only justification is wanting to kill the children of those who supported the green. Not even those who did, but their children that were completely blameless. Real nice fellow. - He carries out basically a coup d'eta by assuming the position of Hand out of the blue. Who put him there? Nobody. - He doubles down on this by isolating Aegon so he can have full control. For his ,,protection". Yeah right. - He puts the ones responsible for Aegon II's death on trial. Here he falls in the same mentality as Ned, and they are both horribly wrong. Breaking ones vows and obligations to save lives is not dishonorable at all. Jaime's only mistake was that he didn't kill Aerys earlier, thus saving tens of thousands that died in the war. He still did save countless hundreds of thousands. Had Larys and Corlys not acted tens of thousands would have died in a sack. Which brings me to a bigger point. - He doesn't seem to give 2 shits about human life. Think about it, he actively seeks out war with the Hightowers, Baratheons, Lannisters and Velaryons, and doesn't care if somebody saved any lives. - He wants to kill the soldiers that saved Baella and when he can't he calls them dogs. Bitch one they were only following orders and two they were saving her. But they betrayed their king... The one you wanted dead. - He doesn't only want to kill the ring leaders, but all those who might or might not have known about Aegon's death. Orwyle had at best a marginal role in the whole affair. Plus he used torture to exact confessions. So yeah Orwyle's guilt is let's say questionable. - Yet for all his hard line view on honor and justice he goes back on his decision to kill Corlys just because Alys Blackwood offered to marry him in exchange. Yeah real honorable fellow. So what do you think about the Old Man in the North? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 8 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: - He waltzes in after the lads have already ended the war and starts acting like the big dick despite doing fuck all. He definitely came too late and feels that treason stole the victory which, 'by right', should have been his. 8 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: - He plans to continue the war and the bloodshed, and for what? Aegon II is dead, the war of succession is over, everyone agrees Aegon III is the legitimate ruler. His only justification is wanting to kill the children of those who supported the green. Not even those who did, but their children that were completely blameless. Real nice fellow. Well, he wanted to punish the people who started the war and who helped the usurper Aegon II. I'd agree that the families are not necessarily to blame for the actions of their lords, although I'd assume that Lyonel Hightower definitely was in his father's camp and would have continued the war if he hadn't had the hots for his Black stepmother. With the Lannisters I think you are right - the Loreon boy certainly had nothing to do with the Dance. But with the Four Storms I'd not go so far - Cassandra and Maris definitely were in the Green camp and the latter was involved in the start of the serious bloodshed. But overall it is not that unusual to collectively punish a noble house for the actions of the leader, nor to condemn them for the actions of single person. Tywin and especially Jaime make the Lannisters look bad, and their enemies don't really differentiate all that much. Some do, but not all of them. You see that very strongly in AGoT when the Starks don't really see Tyrion as different from his siblings or father, or how the Brotherhood and Lord Wyman end up treating all the Freys. And Cregan has some arguments that do have merit - like that Aegon III is only secure on the Iron Throne when it is clear that the Greens won't/can't proclaim Jaehaera queen regnant in his place. 8 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: - He carries out basically a coup d'eta by assuming the position of Hand out of the blue. Who put him there? Nobody. That was actually a consensual thing among the Blacks at court - they decided that Cregan had to be 'Hand of the Uncrowned King' to be able to sit in judgment over the lords he had imprisoned earlier. The coup was to arrest the men in the first place. 8 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: - He doubles down on this by isolating Aegon so he can have full control. For his ,,protection". Yeah right. A half-truth I'd say - Aegon III certainly could trust Corlys Velaryon but most definitely not Larys Strong. But I'd agree that Cregan also did that to control the king's person and thus also the court. 8 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: - He puts the ones responsible for Aegon II's death on trial. Here he falls in the same mentality as Ned, and they are both horribly wrong. Breaking ones vows and obligations to save lives is not dishonorable at all. Jaime's only mistake was that he didn't kill Aerys earlier, thus saving tens of thousands that died in the war. He still did save countless hundreds of thousands. Had Larys and Corlys not acted tens of thousands would have died in a sack. Which brings me to a bigger point. Of course it is dishonorable to turn on your king - especially if you are a Kingsguard as Jaime was. Those people live in a feudal world with chivalric ideals, they are not utilitaristic automatons - nobody cares about the lives of the rabble and whatnot. Jaime didn't murder his king to save anyone, he did it, because he wanted to do it and he enjoyed doing it. There is no indication that Corlys and Larys had to murder Aegon II to hand over the city to the Lads. They could have imprisoned him the way they imprisoned Alicent. I certainly understand why Corlys - who never was a Green by choice but played along because they had the upper hand and he wanted to restore peace - moved against Aegon II, but Larys Strong was just a vile traitor. The men turning against Aegon II were opportunistic assholes who did that (Corlys excluded I'd say) because they knew if they stood with their doomed king they would have no part in the regency government of Aegon III. They did not want to save the people of KL, they wanted to save themselves and their positions. Cregan and Ned both understand that there is a difference between fighting a tyrant and deposing him, and rewarding men who betray their lord/king expecting to be rewarded for that. 8 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: - He doesn't seem to give 2 shits about human life. Think about it, he actively seeks out war with the Hightowers, Baratheons, Lannisters and Velaryons, and doesn't care if somebody saved any lives. Cregan marched to war so his men would die a glorious death in battle. He doesn't kill people to save other people, he wants to kill people so some of his people are killed, too. It makes no sense to judge him by weird standards about avoiding bloodshed. You don't go to war when you want to save people. 8 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: - He wants to kill the soldiers that saved Baella and when he can't he calls them dogs. Bitch one they were only following orders and two they were saving her. But they betrayed their king... The one you wanted dead. That isn't that much of a problem all things considered. If I fight a war with another group I'm not entitled at all to cheer traitors on the other side who do my work for me without asking me first. Perhaps I don't want traitors in my army/state/government? Perhaps I don't want to reward them and instead want to maintain a standard where the betrayal of superiors is not rewarded, no matter who profits from such betrayal? That is not that difficult to grasp. 8 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: - He doesn't only want to kill the ring leaders, but all those who might or might not have known about Aegon's death. Orwyle had at best a marginal role in the whole affair. Plus he used torture to exact confessions. So yeah Orwyle's guilt is let's say questionable. First, torture isn't strange. Everybody tortures prisoners in Westeros and Martinworld in general. That's standard procedure. But as Cregan points out - apparently Orwyle provided the conspirators with the poison that was used to murder the king and didn't want to know nor did he inform the king about what Larys and Corlys were doing. This is certainly treason by omission, even more so if he correctly guessed that the gang wanted to murder the king with that poison. I mean, the Grand Maester is beholden to the king directly - if he had information that people may have wanted to murder him, and if actively gave them the means to do so the man is a traitor. 8 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: - Yet for all his hard line view on honor and justice he goes back on his decision to kill Corlys just because Alys Blackwood offered to marry him in exchange. Yeah real honorable fellow. That wasn't particularly honorable, although I doubt he would have insisted on that particular execution even if Aly hadn't sort of offered her hand. 8 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: So what do you think about the Old Man in the North? I don't like him all that much, but I've no issue with what he wanted to accomplish in the south nor that he wanted to execute the traitors. His mistake/cowardice was that he didn't keep the power once he had it - had he ruled the Realm as Lord Regent and Hand throughout Aegon III's minority things may have been much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FictionIsntReal Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 2 hours ago, Lord Varys said: But overall it is not that unusual to collectively punish a noble house for the actions of the leader, nor to condemn them for the actions of single person. Tywin and especially Jaime make the Lannisters look bad, and their enemies don't really differentiate all that much. Some do, but not all of them. You see that very strongly in AGoT when the Starks don't really see Tyrion as different from his siblings or father Tywin was still leading the Lannisters while the war was going on, and his sons were fighting on his behalf. That's not the same as insisting on punishing them after a surrender. Quote or how the Brotherhood and Lord Wyman end up treating all the Freys. Walder Frey is still alive and claiming authority over the Riverlands. Quote Aegon III certainly could trust Corlys Velaryon Corlys died not that long after the Dance, but during it Rhaenyra imprisoned him for undermining her orders and he conspired to assassinate the next monarch he served. He's not as awful as many participants in the Dance, but "loyal" or "trustworthy" isn't the primary term I'd use to describe him either. Quote The men turning against Aegon II were opportunistic assholes who did that (Corlys excluded I'd say) because they knew if they stood with their doomed king they would have no part in the regency government of Aegon III. They did not want to save the people of KL, they wanted to save themselves and their positions. Why can't it be both? Quote Cregan marched to war so his men would die a glorious death in battle. He doesn't kill people to save other people, he wants to kill people so some of his people are killed, too. It makes no sense to judge him by weird standards about avoiding bloodshed. You don't go to war when you want to save people. You might call the norm of avoiding bloodshed "weird standards", but they were shared by basically everyone other than Cregan at the end of the Dance. As Peter Turchin has noted, people tend to develop an aversion to war after a particularly big and bloody one, until a later generation comes along which has forgotten all that. Quote That isn't that much of a problem all things considered. If I fight a war with another group I'm not entitled at all to cheer traitors on the other side who do my work for me without asking me first. Perhaps I don't want traitors in my army/state/government? Perhaps I don't want to reward them and instead want to maintain a standard where the betrayal of superiors is not rewarded, no matter who profits from such betrayal? You always have the option of neither rewarding nor punishing them. Quote apparently Orwyle provided the conspirators with the poison that was used to murder the king and didn't want to know nor did he inform the king about what Larys and Corlys were doing. This is certainly treason by omission, even more so if he correctly guessed that the gang wanted to murder the king with that poison. I don't think the Grand Maester is required to clear everything with the King before providing something to a fellow member of the SC. Quote His mistake/cowardice was that he didn't keep the power once he had it - had he ruled the Realm as Lord Regent and Hand throughout Aegon III's minority things may have been much better. He was a long ways from home and hadn't come south to be Hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roswell Posted June 17, 2020 Share Posted June 17, 2020 Cregan and Torrhen are the only two Starks which I like. I do not like any of Ned and Catelyn's spawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenin Posted June 17, 2020 Share Posted June 17, 2020 7 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: He waltzes in after the lads have already ended the war and starts acting like the big dick despite doing fuck all. Not really his fault, he was marching to King's Landing already, the Lads just beat him to it. He's it right however, acting as if the war was done was an error, him taking on Storm's End, Casterly Rock and Oldtown is suicidal however. 7 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: - He plans to continue the war and the bloodshed, and for what? Aegon II is dead, the war of succession is over, everyone agrees Aegon III is the legitimate ruler. His only justification is wanting to kill the children of those who supported the green. Not even those who did, but their children that were completely blameless. Real nice fellow. Everyone agreed?? Nothing Cregan said was false, the war wasn't over until the enemies submitted to the winner or were unable or unwilling to carry the fight, which wasn't the case. Not everyone agreed that Aegon was the legitimate ruler either. And about the children bit, this is a bit about Aenys reign... Quote The new king’s mettle would be tested sooner than anyone could have imagined. The Wars of Conquest had left scars throughout the realm.Sons now come of age dreamed of avenging long-dead fathers. Knights remembered the days when a man with a sword and a horse and a suit of armor could slash his way to riches and glory. Lords recalled a time when they did not need a king’s leave to tax their smallfolk or kill their enemies. “The chains the Dragon forged can yet be broken,” the discontented told one another. “We can win our freedoms back, but now is the time to strike, for this new king is weak.” 7 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: He carries out basically a coup d'eta by assuming the position of Hand out of the blue. Who put him there? Nobody. The would be King and his council. 7 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: He doubles down on this by isolating Aegon so he can have full control. For his ,,protection". Yeah right Nothing he does is aimed to hurt Aegon, in fact, of all the carers that isolated infant rulers, he seems the more genuine. He believed that the city was full of traitors and murderes that would do off the nephew as soon as they did off the uncle... And he was right. And if he wanted to prosecute Aegon's killers, those not having access to the King was vital. 7 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: He puts the ones responsible for Aegon II's death on trial. Here he falls in the same mentality as Ned, and they are both horribly wrong. Breaking ones vows and obligations to save lives is not dishonorable at all. Jaime's only mistake was that he didn't kill Aerys earlier, thus saving tens of thousands that died in the war. He still did save countless hundreds of thousands. Had Larys and Corlys not acted tens of thousands would have died in a sack. Which brings me to a bigger point Kingslaying should never be encouraged, you always start by ending tyrants but you end full praetorian guard in their worst moments. And i can't really talk for Corlys but Larys Strong deserved no better end than the wall or the rope, letting a man like him in power positions would be as wise as pardoning Varys. 7 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: He doesn't seem to give 2 shits about human life. Think about it, he actively seeks out war with the Hightowers, Baratheons, Lannisters and Velaryons, and doesn't care if somebody saved any lives. Well, ofc. His whole campaign is based on sparing mouths to the North, which is his main concern. For that to happen, more winter wolves had to die in the field. 7 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: He wants to kill the soldiers that saved Baella and when he can't he calls them dogs. Bitch one they were only following orders and two they were saving her. But they betrayed their king... The one you wanted dead. Well, what better name would you give them, Is Sandor less of a dog because he saved Sansa?? I suppose that he could've always called them goons. There is a difference between deception and betrayal and honorable death in battle. That's why the Red Wedding is universally condennmed regardless of the side of the conflict 7 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: He doesn't only want to kill the ring leaders, but all those who might or might not have known about Aegon's death. Orwyle had at best a marginal role in the whole affair. Plus he used torture to exact confessions. So yeah Orwyle's guilt is let's say questionable. He was cleaning the House, exactly what Stannis wants to do once he got to be King... He used torture confessions but the plotters needed the poison from someone and Owyle is the likely option. That said, I don't really like him, Martin wrote him to be super badass without really given him badass moments, just him bullying children. Then there is this bit. Quote The Lads found themselves overmatched. Cowed, they gave way, and agreed to join their own power to Lord Stark’s when he marched against Storm’s End. Munkun says they did so willingly, convinced that the wolf lord had the right of it. “Flush with victory, they wanted more,” he writes in the True Telling. “They hungered for more glory, for the fame that young men dream of that can only be won in battle.” Mushroom takes a more cynical view, and suggests that the young lordlings were simply terrified of Cregan Stark. The result was the same. “The city was his, to do with as he wished,” Septon Eustace says. “The northman had taken it without drawing a sword or loosing an arrow. Be they king’s men or queen’s men, stormlanders or seahorses, riverlords or gutter knights, highborn or low, common soldiers deferred to him as if they had been born to his service.” Come on, this is just hilarious. 7 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: Yet for all his hard line view on honor and justice he goes back on his decision to kill Corlys just because Alys Blackwood offered to marry him in exchange. Yeah real honorable fellow. Yeah that was hilarious. 4 hours ago, FictionIsntReal said: He was a long ways from home and hadn't come south to be Hand. Agreed. 6 hours ago, Lord Varys said: His mistake/cowardice was that he didn't keep the power once he had it - had he ruled the Realm as Lord Regent and Hand throughout Aegon III's minority things may have been much better. Don't really know why it's a mistake, cowardice doesn't make sense. He didn't want the job and there were competent people to take care of things. How could he know that more than a half of the set rulers would either die or just leave in less than two years of his departure?? His people were and concerns were in the North not in King's Landing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenGail3 Posted June 17, 2020 Share Posted June 17, 2020 I guess. He was a dick who overruled Aegon and wanted to burn House Lannister and Baratheon to the ground: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Northman Reborn Posted June 17, 2020 Share Posted June 17, 2020 As an admitted Stark fanboy I can say I don’t particularly like or dislike him. Not sure if the author’s intention is for him to come across as a badass of some sort - added to his famous sword skills as per the Dragonknight - but I don’t get any of the awe inspiring vibes from him that I get from Theon the Hungry Wolf for example. Cregan just seems like a grumpy old patriarch who didn’t achieve much by way of military accomplishments and probably felt robbed by that missed opportunity. Not saying he wasn’t militarily skilled. Just that he didn’t have the chance to really prove it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alyn Oakenfist Posted June 17, 2020 Author Share Posted June 17, 2020 10 hours ago, Lord Varys said: But with the Four Storms I'd not go so far - Cassandra and Maris definitely were in the Green camp and the latter was involved in the start of the serious bloodshed. All we know they did was convince Aemond kill Lucerys, but Cregan had no way of knowing that. 10 hours ago, Lord Varys said: And Cregan has some arguments that do have merit - like that Aegon III is only secure on the Iron Throne when it is clear that the Greens won't/can't proclaim Jaehaera queen regnant in his place. Nobody would ever proclaim Jaehaera queen regnant given her let's say precocious mental state. Also this is punishing people for what they may do, not for what they did do. 11 hours ago, Lord Varys said: That was actually a consensual thing among the Blacks at court - they decided that Cregan had to be 'Hand of the Uncrowned King' to be able to sit in judgment over the lords he had imprisoned earlier. The coup was to arrest the men in the first place. However you pronounce potato, it still comes out as a coup. 11 hours ago, Lord Varys said: nobody cares about the lives of the rabble and whatnot. Edmure would like to have a word with you. I do agree however that not giving a crap about the lives of the commoners is very common in Westeros and something that needs to go. 11 hours ago, Lord Varys said: Of course it is dishonorable to turn on your king - especially if you are a Kingsguard as Jaime was. Those people live in a feudal world with chivalric ideals, they are not utilitaristic automatons - nobody cares about the lives of the rabble and whatnot. Jaime didn't murder his king to save anyone, he did it, because he wanted to do it and he enjoyed doing it. Well as Jaime put it, protect the innocents is part of his vows. Also were do you get that he enjoyed doing it? I agree it was a combination of factors, Aerys ordering him to kill Tywin, Aerys's mad behavior and his boundless cruelty and Aerys preparing to destroy KL, but I think you have a pretty strong anti Jaime bias. 11 hours ago, Lord Varys said: There is no indication that Corlys and Larys had to murder Aegon II to hand over the city to the Lads. They could have imprisoned him the way they imprisoned Alicent. See here it's the same thing as Jaime. Why didn't Jaime just knock out Aerys? Simple. His vows are protect and obey the king, not protect, obey and don't kill the king. He would have broken the same vows regardless, so what does he lose by killing him? He'd still be a traitor and a turn clock. The same goes for Corlys and Larys. And both Aerys and Aegon were dead men walking. Why spare them? Just to add the risk of them escaping? 11 hours ago, Lord Varys said: but Larys Strong was just a vile traitor. Given how much he prolonged the war by spiriting the royal family away, I'm going to have to agree on this one. The guy was responsible for half the war, and then at the last moment he changed sides. So yeah he was a vile traitor. 11 hours ago, Lord Varys said: Cregan and Ned both understand that there is a difference between fighting a tyrant and deposing him, and rewarding men who betray their lord/king expecting to be rewarded for that. Ned betrayed his king all the same. As did Jon. Aerys commanded Jon to kill his wards, so Jon rebelled with the clear goal of killing Aerys. Aerys commanded Jaime to kill his father and watch as he kills hundreds of thousands. So Jaime too rebelled, with the goal of killing Aerys. And when Jaime rebelled he didn't kill tens of thousands. Jaime had way better reason then Jon to rebel and Jaime didn't but tens of thousands of lives on the line, just his and Aerys's. So why is Jaime the despised turncloack and Jon Arryn not? Or how about Hoster Tully? He only joined the frey because he could get some good marriages. Everyone who fights a tyrant is betraying their king. At least in the case of Robert's rebellion. In the case of the Dance I do agree that it's a little harder to say the turncloacks were justified. 11 hours ago, Lord Varys said: It makes no sense to judge him by weird standards about avoiding bloodshed. You don't go to war when you want to save people. Except by that point everyone but him was saying enough is enough. 11 hours ago, Lord Varys said: Perhaps I don't want to reward them and instead want to maintain a standard where the betrayal of superiors is not rewarded, no matter who profits from such betrayal? Well... If there was any logic in punishing Corlys and Larys, there is no logic here. Those guys were doing what their superiors were telling them, they were simply following those superiors orders. 11 hours ago, Lord Varys said: First, torture isn't strange. Everybody tortures prisoners in Westeros and Martinworld in general. That's standard procedure. But as Cregan points out - apparently Orwyle provided the conspirators with the poison that was used to murder the king and didn't want to know nor did he inform the king about what Larys and Corlys were doing. This is certainly treason by omission, even more so if he correctly guessed that the gang wanted to murder the king with that poison. I mean, the Grand Maester is beholden to the king directly - if he had information that people may have wanted to murder him, and if actively gave them the means to do so the man is a traitor. Torture isn't that prevalent. In the books it only appears in AFFC and ADWD. As for Orwyle providing the poison, I find that doubtful. Larys was to shrewd of a man to involve someone with well known Green loyalties. Are you really saying he couldn't have gotten the poison from somewhere else? As foe Orwyle's confession, remember Rowan? He confessed to downright everything. Confessions under torture have the value of dead shit. So Cregan judged Orwyle guilty just on the basis of a confession gotten under torture. Before that how did he get the idea to put him under torture? 11 hours ago, Lord Varys said: had he ruled the Realm as Lord Regent and Hand throughout Aegon III's minority things may have been much better. I mean that's not saying much. Moon Boy would have done a better job then what we got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alyn Oakenfist Posted June 17, 2020 Author Share Posted June 17, 2020 8 hours ago, FictionIsntReal said: Corlys died not that long after the Dance, but during it Rhaenyra imprisoned him for undermining her orders and he conspired to assassinate the next monarch he served. He's not as awful as many participants in the Dance, but "loyal" or "trustworthy" isn't the primary term I'd use to describe him either. Well he only betrayed Rhaenyra because she wanted to kill his son. It's fair to say he was loyal besides that. He did turn cloak two times but that was only because he had no other choice. And as we can see despite Rhaenyra's shitty actions, deep down he remained a black till the end, as did his son Adam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alyn Oakenfist Posted June 17, 2020 Author Share Posted June 17, 2020 4 hours ago, frenin said: He's it right however, acting as if the war was done was an error, him taking on Storm's End, Casterly Rock and Oldtown is suicidal however. It was done though. The succession war was over, Aegon III was the legitimate king in the eyes of everyone. 4 hours ago, frenin said: Everyone agreed?? Nothing Cregan said was false, the war wasn't over until the enemies submitted to the winner or were unable or unwilling to carry the fight, which wasn't the case. Not everyone agreed that Aegon was the legitimate ruler either. Well all the enemies were no longer willing and no longer able to continue the war as things would have it. 4 hours ago, frenin said: Kingslaying should never be encouraged, you always start by ending tyrants but you end full praetorian guard in their worst moments. Well we did discuss this before, but reaching praetorian guard levels in Westeros is impossible. They only got away with the stuff they did because they were an incredible force with absolute control over the royal palace. And they were very numerous. 4 hours ago, frenin said: Well, ofc. His whole campaign is based on sparing mouths to the North, which is his main concern. For that to happen, more winter wolves had to die in the field. If they want to die, let them commit suicide, they don't have to kill other people if they want to die. 4 hours ago, frenin said: There is a difference between deception and betrayal and honorable death in battle. That's why the Red Wedding is universally condennmed regardless of the side of the conflict First off have you read the books? One of the main ideas is that war is hell. There is nothing honorable about death in battle. As for the Red wedding, it is one thing to condemn the Frey's responsible for it and another to condemn the Frey levies that did as their master commanded. The same goes for the soldiers that saved Baella. 4 hours ago, frenin said: He used torture confessions but the plotters needed the poison from someone and Owyle is the likely option. Not really though. We don't know the type of poison that was used, but Larys was clever enough to get it from wherever he wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenin Posted June 17, 2020 Share Posted June 17, 2020 On 6/17/2020 at 10:51 AM, Alyn Oakenfist said: It was done though. The succession war was over, Aegon III was the legitimate king in the eyes of everyone. Who is everyone?? The Tyrells hadn't say anything, the Baratheons hadn't say anything, the Hightowers wanted more war and the Lannisters hadn't say anything. Hell we're literally told that saying that the war was over could only be done by hindsight... Quote With the infallibility of hindsight, we now look back through the centuries and say the Dance was done, but this seemed less certain to those who lived through its dark and dangerous aftermath. With Septon Eustace and Grand Maester Orwyle languishing in dungeons (where Orwyle had begun writing his confessions, the text that would provide Munkun with the foundation on which he would build his monumental True Telling), only Mushroom remains to take us beyond the court chronicles and royal edicts. “The great lords would have given us another two years of war,” the fool declares in his Testimony, “it was the women who made the peace. Black Aly, the Maiden of the Vale, the Three Widows, the Dragon Twins, ’twas them who brought the bloodshed to an end, and not with swords or poison, but with ravens, words, and kisses.” On 6/17/2020 at 10:51 AM, Alyn Oakenfist said: Well all the enemies were no longer willing and no longer able to continue the war as things would have it. They didn't know that, else they would've bent the knee as soon as the uncle was killed. And the Hightowers were more than able and willing to continue the fight. On 6/17/2020 at 10:51 AM, Alyn Oakenfist said: Well we did discuss this before, but reaching praetorian guard levels in Westeros is impossible. They only got away with the stuff they did because they were an incredible force with absolute control over the royal palace. And they were very numerous True but the Kingsguard getting more and more corrupt over time is indeed quite possible, you only have to see Robert's, Joffrey's and Tommen's. On 6/17/2020 at 10:51 AM, Alyn Oakenfist said: If they want to die, let them commit suicide, they don't have to kill other people if they want to die. Sure, good for them they are at war tho. On 6/17/2020 at 10:51 AM, Alyn Oakenfist said: First off have you read the books? One of the main ideas is that war is hell. There is nothing honorable about death in battle. As for the Red wedding, it is one thing to condemn the Frey's responsible for it and another to condemn the Frey levies that did as their master commanded. The same goes for the soldiers that saved Baella. Yes, I've read the books, war being hell doesn't change the fact that people do prefer a certain type of hell all the time, that's why things like the Red Wedding, poisoning or betrayal are heavily frowned upon by the Westerosi. And Westeros is a martial and medieval society, they do believe that there is honor by dying in battle, even someone as two hand Jaime believe it. Why?? Next time they would be less eager to carry on something like that. On 6/17/2020 at 10:51 AM, Alyn Oakenfist said: Not really though. We don't know the type of poison that was used, but Larys was clever enough to get it from wherever he wanted. And the likeliest person is Orwyle, none of them thought they were ever going to get caught so... On 6/17/2020 at 10:33 AM, Alyn Oakenfist said: All we know they did was convince Aemond kill Lucerys, but Cregan had no way of knowing that. The Four Storms didn't convince Aemond to do anything lmao, one of them just teased him and Aemond went ape, the man is an imbecile. One of the Four Storms did try to kill Daenara tho, blaming her for having been disfigured when that was ironically Peake's fault and she was working to him. On 6/17/2020 at 10:33 AM, Alyn Oakenfist said: Ned betrayed his king all the same. As did Jon. Aerys commanded Jon to kill his wards, so Jon rebelled with the clear goal of killing Aerys. Aerys commanded Jaime to kill his father and watch as he kills hundreds of thousands. So Jaime too rebelled, with the goal of killing Aerys. And when Jaime rebelled he didn't kill tens of thousands. Jaime had way better reason then Jon to rebel and Jaime didn't but tens of thousands of lives on the line, just his and Aerys's. So why is Jaime the despised turncloack and Jon Arryn not? Or how about Hoster Tully? He only joined the frey because he could get some good marriages. Everyone who fights a tyrant is betraying their king. At least in the case of Robert's rebellion. In the case of the Dance I do agree that it's a little harder to say the turncloacks were justified. They were not his Kingsguard. But otherwise yes, Jon Arryn won, he wrote the history. Had he lost he would've gone down as a horrible traitor. And 5 of the Great Houses would've ended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peach King Posted June 17, 2020 Share Posted June 17, 2020 I completely agree. He's an arrogant prick who started throwing his weight around as soon as he arrived in KL, pressing for more war even after the realm was in ruins cause the North is MANRY and MACHO. Also what's so great about his supposed romance with Alysanne Blackwood? They met, they talked, they agreed to marry. Where's the development, the angst, the drama? Boring is what I call it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commentator Posted June 17, 2020 Share Posted June 17, 2020 Cregan is a feudal lord. You can't really expect him to be nice. He will dispense his own brand of justice as he sees fit. He took control in KL because he could. There was a power vacuum and he plugged that hole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted June 17, 2020 Share Posted June 17, 2020 6 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: All we know they did was convince Aemond kill Lucerys, but Cregan had no way of knowing that. Are you sure about that? And Cassandra Baratheon was the future queen of Aegon II - the Baratheons were active Greens and Cregan could even think/assume his widow might want to avenge her husband and raise another army. She didn't, but she could have. 6 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: Nobody would ever proclaim Jaehaera queen regnant given her let's say precocious mental state. Also this is punishing people for what they may do, not for what they did do. Cregan's argument that they had secure the person of Princess Jaehaera, not rely on, so far, empty promises. And of course they could have crowned her queen, there were Greens at court during the reign of Aegon II who, correctly, thought she had a better claim than Aegon II. If Arianne Martell can crown Myrcella, then people hating the fact Rhaenyra's son rose to the throne could have crowned Jaehaera just to spite them all. And they would have done that, one assumes, if Cregan had continued the war. Because Jaehaera was still at Storm's End. 6 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: However you pronounce potato, it still comes out as a coup. Again, not the trials, just the arrest of the murderers of the king. But then - nobody had put them into power, either, right? They sort of run the show as a result of murdering the king. They had no legal authority whatsoever unless you assume murdering the king is a legal act that grants you power. 6 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: Edmure would like to have a word with you. I do agree however that not giving a crap about the lives of the commoners is very common in Westeros and something that needs to go. Edmure cares about his own smallfolk to a degree, not the Kingslanders, one assumes. And neither Larys Strong nor Corlys Velaryon were the lords of KL, no? 6 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: Well as Jaime put it, protect the innocents is part of his vows. Also were do you get that he enjoyed doing it? I agree it was a combination of factors, Aerys ordering him to kill Tywin, Aerys's mad behavior and his boundless cruelty and Aerys preparing to destroy KL, but I think you have a pretty strong anti Jaime bias. Reread the scene where he remembers things. And how he himself that killing Aerys was one of his better deeds. He likes having been the guy who did this, and he enjoyed watching the fear in Aerys' eyes when he told the man what he had come to do now. The point here is that there is no indication Jaime had any plans/desire to kill his king before he had the chance of doing it and get away - i.e. when his father was sacking the city and the king was a dead man walking anyway. He wasn't doing anything out of idealism or heroism but opportunism. 6 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: See here it's the same thing as Jaime. Why didn't Jaime just knock out Aerys? Simple. His vows are protect and obey the king, not protect, obey and don't kill the king. He would have broken the same vows regardless, so what does he lose by killing him? He'd still be a traitor and a turn clock. The same goes for Corlys and Larys. And both Aerys and Aegon were dead men walking. Why spare them? Just to add the risk of them escaping? To save the people there was no need to kill the king. And it is this what we are talking about - the regicide, not a lesser betrayal of the king which, of course, is also treason, but not the kind of treason that turns you into a kingslayer. Corlys and Larys murdered their king because they wanted to do that, too. Both because that would made them the masters of the young puppet king, Aegon III, and because they thought it would ensure that they themselves would be spared by the Lads and their allies. It is ridiculous to assume that a cripple like Aegon II could escape. The man couldn't even ascend or descend stairs or sit the Iron Throne. They could have put him into his bedchamber and he wouldn't even have realized that a new king was sitting on the Iron Throne. And Corlys pretty much makes it clear why he killed Aegon II - because the man was a notorious warmonger, a mad dog who had to be put down. He is pretty straightforward when he says that the man could have been with them today if he had seen reason. Although I doubt that this was his only motivation. Aegon II was directly responsible for the death of his beloved wife, Princess Rhaenys, and thanks to his ridiculous war Corlys Velaryon lost High Tide, a third of his fleet, Spicetown, three grandsons, and a bastard grandson who may have been his own son. Not to mention the man repeatedly threatened to murder his granddaughter. 6 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: Ned betrayed his king all the same. As did Jon. Aerys commanded Jon to kill his wards, so Jon rebelled with the clear goal of killing Aerys. Aerys commanded Jaime to kill his father and watch as he kills hundreds of thousands. So Jaime too rebelled, with the goal of killing Aerys. And when Jaime rebelled he didn't kill tens of thousands. Jaime had way better reason then Jon to rebel and Jaime didn't but tens of thousands of lives on the line, just his and Aerys's. So why is Jaime the despised turncloack and Jon Arryn not? Or how about Hoster Tully? He only joined the frey because he could get some good marriages. Everyone who fights a tyrant is betraying their king. At least in the case of Robert's rebellion. In the case of the Dance I do agree that it's a little harder to say the turncloacks were justified. Ned and Robert weren't exactly the king's men from the moment the king commanded their deaths. Ned wasn't even a lord at the time, and never swore an oath of fealty to Aerys II (although Robert as Lord of Storm's End likely did). Jon Arryn was a traitor, though, no doubt about that. The point overall, though, is that men close to the king, men actually in his Kingsguard or on his council should be held to different standards than some lords at the far end of the Realm. If Rodrik Cassel or Maester Luwin or Jory Cassel had arranged the Red Wedding this would have been worse betrayal than if Roose Bolton had done it, no? Corlys and Larys and their thugs are - just like Jaime - the worst kind of betrayers. And the worst of all is Larys Strong who effectively played Corlys and against Aegon II and manipulated him into this betrayal. The Greens were the vilest thugs, too, always intending to eventually do away with Corlys, but that doesn't change the fact that things could have ended in a less vile manner (as Corlys openly defecting to the Black side again, say) instead of this cowardly sitting around and waiting and then deciding to finish off the side which lost in the end. 6 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: Except by that point everyone but him was saying enough is enough. Which is why he didn't get his war. And I'm not saying his war was a great idea. He came too late and pretty much behaves like a child there. The reason why he punishes the murderers of Aegon II is because they stole his victory from them. He wanted to be the one who killed the usurper. If he had gotten his battle and the satisfaction of killing Aegon II and putting Aegon III on the Iron Throne he would have likely not insisted on that weird continuation of the war which he just seems to be doing because he wants his men to fight somebody so they get what they came for. 6 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: Torture isn't that prevalent. In the books it only appears in AFFC and ADWD. As for Orwyle providing the poison, I find that doubtful. Larys was to shrewd of a man to involve someone with well known Green loyalties. Are you really saying he couldn't have gotten the poison from somewhere else? As foe Orwyle's confession, remember Rowan? He confessed to downright everything. Confessions under torture have the value of dead shit. So Cregan judged Orwyle guilty just on the basis of a confession gotten under torture. Before that how did he get the idea to put him under torture? But nobody ever says anything that torture is wrong in Westeros, do they? The Rowan thing illustrates for us that torture is wrong, but Aegon III did not abolish the office of Lord Confessor and dismissed all his torturers once he took over. Torture is an integral part of the justice system, but it shouldn't be abused (which doesn't work, of course, but that's what people in Westeros think, else they wouldn't have any torturers). We don't know what poison was used, but poison doesn't lie around on the streets in this world. I find it plausible that they got the poison from Orwyle, and if Orwyle did that he is guilty. Either for being a co-conspirator or for being fine with handing dangerous materials to men who are going to use them to poison somebody - even if he hadn't realized that they were intending to poison the king, he should have informed said king that his dear advisers were trying to poison somebody. That would have been his duty. 6 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: I mean that's not saying much. Moon Boy would have done a better job then what we got. Oh, I was not so much relying on Cregan's competence but his dominance of court. Aegon III's regency sucked because there were too many regents and Unwin Peake - if one guy had run the show from start to finish things would have gone much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myrish Lace Posted June 17, 2020 Share Posted June 17, 2020 Cregan was a scumbag, but Lads and Valemen eased him out before he could do much damage to the realm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenin Posted June 17, 2020 Share Posted June 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, Myrish Lace said: Cregan was a scumbag, Wow, the last time you had a completely distorted version of him, seems that didn't change. 5 minutes ago, Myrish Lace said: but Lads and Valemen eased him out before he could do much damage to the realm. Doubtful, he could've stayed as much as he wanted to, he just wasn't interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myrish Lace Posted June 17, 2020 Share Posted June 17, 2020 27 minutes ago, frenin said: Wow, the last time you had a completely distorted version of him, seems that didn't change. If you consider F&B's version of Cregan to be distorted, then sure. 27 minutes ago, frenin said: Doubtful, he could've stayed as much as he wanted to Evidently not: The False Dawn had come and gone, and now the Hour of the Wolf (as Grand Maester Munkun names it) was waning too. The situation and the city were both slipping from the hands of Cregan Stark. When Lord Leowyn Corbray and his brother arrived in King’s Landing and joined the ruling council, adding their voices to those of Lady Arryn and the Lads, the Wolf of Winterfell oft found himself at odds with all of them. Here and there throughout the realm a few stubborn loyalists still flew Aegon II’s golden dragon, but they were of little significance; the Dance was done, the others all agreed, it was time to make the peace and set the realm to rights. Cregan took charge in the capital by force, but quickly became politically isolated. His intimidation of Lads did not last long. Valemen and Lads were willing to throw him a bone or two, but nobody wanted to obey him anymore. At that point Cregan could: - take conciliatory prizes and walk away (which he did) - take a place on regency council. However this would mean he would not be in charge. He would be forced to share power with six other people, his equals, none of whom shared his views. He would be outvoted on every issue of import and have no power at all (hence why he didn't try it) - fight for real leadership. Fighting Lads could work out for Cregan. Fighting Lads and Valemen? Not a chance. With Lads and Valemen and members of the royal family unwilling to follow him, Cregan had no viable choice but to step aside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenin Posted June 17, 2020 Share Posted June 17, 2020 10 hours ago, Myrish Lace said: If you consider F&B's version of Cregan to be distorted, then sure. No, it's just fine. He comes out decently there. 10 hours ago, Myrish Lace said: Evidently not: The False Dawn had come and gone, and now the Hour of the Wolf (as Grand Maester Munkun names it) was waning too. The situation and the city were both slipping from the hands of Cregan Stark. When Lord Leowyn Corbray and his brother arrived in King’s Landing and joined the ruling council, adding their voices to those of Lady Arryn and the Lads, the Wolf of Winterfell oft found himself at odds with all of them. Here and there throughout the realm a few stubborn loyalists still flew Aegon II’s golden dragon, but they were of little significance; the Dance was done, the others all agreed, it was time to make the peace and set the realm to rights. Cregan took charge in the capital by force, but quickly became politically isolated. His intimidation of Lads did not last long. Valemen and Lads were willing to throw him a bone or two, but nobody wanted to obey him anymore. Evidently yes, they were only opposed to the idea of continuing the war, but Cregan still forced them to punish Aegon's murder. Calling that throwing a bone, when Cregan still had Corlys in jail and was not hiding his intention about killing him seems again a distortion. 10 hours ago, Myrish Lace said: At that point Cregan could: - take conciliatory prizes and walk away (which he did) - take a place on regency council. However this would mean he would not be in charge. He would be forced to share power with six other people, his equals, none of whom shared his views. He would be outvoted on every issue of import and have no power at all (hence why he didn't try it) - fight for real leadership. Fighting Lads could work out for Cregan. Fighting Lads and Valemen? Not a chance. With Lads and Valemen and members of the royal family unwilling to follow him, Cregan had no viable choice but to step aside Quote Cregan Stark’s brief service as the Hand of the Uncrowned King ended the next day, when he returned his chain of office to Prince Aegon. He might easily have remained King’s Hand for years, or even claimed the regency until young Aegon came of age, but the south held no interest for him. “The snows are falling in the North,” he announced, “and my place is at Winterfell.” He could've been regent and Hand. Which means that he would've been in charge and mind you, Unwin and Lannister dominated dominated and cowed the court rather easily, including those Valemen. Quote Ser Tyland’s wits remained sharp, however. He might have been expected to have emerged from his torments a bitter man intent upon revenge, but this proved far from true. Instead the Hand claimed a curious failure of memory, insisting that he could not recall who had been black and who green, whilst demonstrating a dogged loyalty to the son of the very queen who had sent him to the torturers. Very quickly Ser Tyland achieved an unspoken dominance over Leowyn Corbray, of whom Mushroom says, “He was thick of neck and thick of wit, but never have I known a man to fart so loudly.” By law, both the Hand and the Lord Protector were subject to the authority of the council of regents, but as the days passed and the moon turned and turned again, the regents convened less and less often, whilst the tireless, blind, hooded Tyland Lannister gathered more and more power to himself. Yeah, It seems like he would've had one hell of a time. None of them shared his view about war, It seems interested trying to extend that to every aspect of politics. In fact if they didn't want him among them, he would've never been offered a place there. Again distorted. The man had little to no interest in the south and him leaving was defined as a happy act. Quote The day after the executions, Lord Stark resigned as Hand. No man ever held the office so briefly, and few left it as gladly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myrish Lace Posted June 17, 2020 Share Posted June 17, 2020 5 hours ago, frenin said: Calling that throwing a bone, That was throwing a bone. It's not like the Lads or Valeman were closely tied to any person who were put on "trial" by Cregan. Jeyne Arryn and Rivermen would be just fine whether Corlys' head was mounted on a spike or not. It was a secondary question compared to big problems like continuation of the war and post-war reconstruction. 5 hours ago, frenin said: He could've been regent and Hand. Which means that he would've been in charge and mind you, Unwin and Lannister dominated dominated and cowed the court rather easily, including those Valemen. Now that is a distortion. Tyland Lannister is specifically noted as conciliatory figure, publicly "forgetting" about nobility's previous party affiliations. To pretend that Cregan could lead the court (or have Regents trust him) the same way as Tyland despite being his polar opposite is quite disingenuous. Unwin's rise to power was specifically ties to a unique situation - his fellow regents were all dead, or departed, or sick. There were two guys remaining - Unwin and Munkun. And Munkun was a maester. This does not work with three guys around, so hypothetical Hand Cregan would not have the same freedom as OTL Hand Unwin. 5 hours ago, frenin said: The man had little to no interest in the south Nothing says "no interest in the south" like performing a coup, placing the King under house arrest and trying to command fellow lords to do your bidding. I'm similarly skeptical about Gyldayn's ability to measure happiness of a dead man a century before Gyldayn's birth. 5 hours ago, frenin said: In fact if they didn't want him among them, I hear the sound of goal posts moving. Lads, Valemen and other did not want Cregan to lead them. Having Cregan on the council of six other regents would be splendid for other six. Cregan would not be able to tell them what to do. And since he was at odds with so many powerful people, it would mean de-facto powerlessness. An ineffectual regent Cregan would be a benefit to other regents - their share of political pie would be greater for it. It's not like they could foresee Regents' mortality rate. Those guys were dropping like flies. Cregan on the other hand had no interest in such an arrangement, so he took the bones thrown to him and left. 5 hours ago, frenin said: He comes out decently there. Of course he comes out very decently - as a perfect picture of an opportunistic scumbag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FictionIsntReal Posted June 17, 2020 Share Posted June 17, 2020 19 hours ago, frenin said: Everyone agreed?? Nothing Cregan said was false, the war wasn't over Was anybody still fighting? Quote letting a man like him in power positions would be as wise as pardoning Varys. What would you think of simply firing him? 14 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: Given how much he prolonged the war by spiriting the royal family away What do people think of Willem Derry "spiriting away" Viserys and Daenerys? Or Varys doing the same for Gendry and allegedly Aegon VI? Quote I'm going to have to agree on this one. The guy was responsible for half the war, and then at the last moment he changed sides. So yeah he was a vile traitor. Larys was a secretive guy who didn't explain any of his actions, so it is a puzzle to figure out why he did what he did. One possible explanation is that he was primarily motivated to keep Rhaenyra off the throne, which would fit with the theory that he killed Harwin and expected her to retaliate against him for that. Quote So why is Jaime the despised turncloack and Jon Arryn not? Jaime was a KG, sworn to protect the king. Jon Arryn as lord of the Eyrie had no obligation to violate something as sacred as guest-right. Quote Larys was to shrewd of a man to involve someone with well known Green loyalties I think Orwyle lied when he tried to present himself as a supporter of Rhaenyra during the initial Small Council session, but I also think he was a relative newcomer to the SC and didn't have a pre-existing loyalty to any faction (which is how maesters are supposed to be, even if that's not always the case in practice). 14 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: He did turn cloak two times but that was only because he had no other choice He chose pragmatically and understandably, but he still chose. Other men might have chosen differently. 14 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: Well we did discuss this before, but reaching praetorian guard levels in Westeros is impossible Ser Perkin the Flea achieved something like that during the Dance. He was able to put Trystane on the throne, then overthrow him for Aegon II, then overthrow him for Aegon III. 13 hours ago, frenin said: Who is everyone?? The late Jasper Wylde and Grover Tully (joined by the overwhelming majority in the Great Councils he had participated in) had both argued that the male succeeds under Andal inheritance laws. That would be Aegon III. People "saying nothing" weren't fighting and didn't actually have a rival candidate. Quote True but the Kingsguard getting more and more corrupt over time is indeed quite possible, you only have to see Robert's, Joffrey's and Tommen's Boros Blount is incredibly ineffective, but not actually a threat to political stability. 7 hours ago, Lord Varys said: there were Greens at court during the reign of Aegon II who, correctly, thought she had a better claim than Aegon II How was her claim better? Aegon III had actually been named by Aegon II as heir, and he was male. Quote If Arianne Martell can crown Myrcella She attempts to do so in Dorne because Dorne has different inheritance laws. Dorne wasn't part of the Seven Kingdoms back then. Quote But then - nobody had put them into power, either, right? Viserys I and Aegon II had put most of them there. Quote They had no legal authority whatsoever unless you assume murdering the king is a legal act that grants you power. Cersei acts to have Robert killed and then becomes Queen regent for Joffrey. Her regency isn't contingent on her being responsible for Robert's death, in fact she tries to keep that secret. Her power is based on the position she had when Robert was king, and who becomes king afterward. Quote He wasn't doing anything out of idealism or heroism but opportunism. Can't it be both? 6 hours ago, Myrish Lace said: Cregan was a scumbag, but Lads and Valemen eased him out before he could do much damage to the realm. He didn't need "easing out", because he wasn't planning on staying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.