Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
RedDragon

Jon’s alternate impact on the war of the five kings

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, RedDragon said:

No it’s not. The north doesn’t care for stannis the only thing that brought them into the fold was how stannis fallowed the advice jon gave him and later it was his victories which stannis only achieved because of the clansmen he gained from Jons advice.

They don't care about Stannis, but they care about the Starks,

Spoiler

"Winter is almost upon us, boy. And winter is death. I would sooner my men die fighting for the Ned's little girl than alone and hungry in the snow, weeping tears that freeze upon their cheeks. No one sings songs of men who die like that. As for me, I am old. This will be my last winter. Let me bathe in Bolton blood before I die. I want to feel it spatter across my face when my axe bites deep into a Bolton skull. I want to lick it off my lips and die with the taste of it on my tongue."

"Aye!" shouted Morgan Liddle. "Blood and battle!" Then all the hillmen were shouting, banging their cups and drinking horns on the table, filling the king's tent with the clangor.

 

12 minutes ago, RedDragon said:

He got stabbed in the back because he fallowed neds advice not in spite of it. Combined that with the other nights watch not seeing the bigger picture 

He got stabbed because he wasn't a good politician. If you can't deal with shortsighted subordinates you're not a good leader at all.

The part of the bigger picture is debatable,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Bottom line, Jon could have helped Robb but it would not make any difference to the ending of House Stark.  The red wedding still happens.  Ghost would be dead alongside Greywind.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best case scenario is to the horror of Catelyn Jon becomes the Stark at winterfell.

I doubt that Jon would be dumb enough to repeat the mistakes made by Rodrik, and if Jon is capable of stopping Winterfell from falling he may save Robb. The whole train that was Robb's campaing dereailed after it. Without the sack of Winterfell, Robb does not sleep with Jeyne out of grief, Catelyn does not free Jaime, Roose may or may not change sides, but the northem position isn't as weak as it was on the cannon.

If Jon goes south with Robb, I agree with the others that he wouldnt be able to do much.

 

Share this post


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

But it wasn't for want of a good commander or fighter that Robb's cause failed. It was for lack of political instincts. Which I'm sad to say Jon showed the same streak of during his tenure as Lord Commander. 

 

It was both. The only reliable commander Robb had was the Blackfish and Robb wanted him at his side and not acting independent, Roose acted so poorly at the Greenfork that still is debated if he was already betraying Robb, Edmure jumped from one blunder to another during the whole war, and Rodrik lost winterfell and Robb's heirs to 20 IB.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
59 minutes ago, Arthur Peres said:

It was both. The only reliable commander Robb had was the Blackfish and Robb wanted him at his side and not acting independent, Roose acted so poorly at the Greenfork that still is debated if he was already betraying Robb, Edmure jumped from one blunder to another during the whole war, and Rodrik lost winterfell and Robb's heirs to 20 IB.

 

Eh, both Roose and Edmure's tenures as commanders are debatable.

In Roose's case, he was sent up against a force that outnumbered him and had vastly more cavalry. If he was intentionally betraying Robb, overcommiting on the Lannister left like Tywin wanted, leaving him open to be flanked and routed would've been the way to do it. He survived with his army in tact, which argues he did his job. To tie down the Lannister force while Robb relieved Riverrun. I don't think Roose was directly plotting treason until he got to Harrenhal. 

Edmure certainly made some questionable calls but honestly, I don't think the Fords and Stone Mill was one of them.  Robb gave Edmure a vague set of orders and marched off to the Westerlands. Then he gets pissed at Edmure because he took initiative to repel and invading force? Was Edmure just supposed to guess along with Robb, because that "blunder" could've been avoided if Robb had bothered to tell him about the plan.

In regards to either of these situations, what is Jon going to do? The northerners in the Golden Fork army aren't going to willingly serve under a 14 year old baseborn boy when more experienced commanders are available. If Robb gave that order, they'd start questioning him more than they already were. Jon taking command of the Riverland army? I'm sure the Tullys would just love to be taking orders from the bastard son of Ned Stark who dishonored their liege lord's daughter/sister. Leaving Jon as castellan at Winterfell is an option. You could argue either way if he would've fallen for Theon's ruse or not, I suppose. A more experienced man in Rodrik did, but Jon showed he had decent tactical instincts at the Wall. That might be your best place for Jon to make a difference, though Catelyn would pitch a fit at Jon Snow acting as de facto Lord of Winterfell. 

Edited by Lord Lannister

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Texas Hold Em said:

 Bottom line, Jon could have helped Robb but it would not make any difference to the ending of House Stark.  The red wedding still happens.  Ghost would be dead alongside Greywind.  

If Jon is with Robb every step of the way, I think it is possible to avoid the Westerling scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The Hoare said:

Jon was neither a talented strategist nor a good politician. He would be given a place on Robb's personal guard and that's all

This

Share this post


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

In Roose's case, he was sent up against a force that outnumbered him and had vastly more cavalry. If he was intentionally betraying Robb, overcommiting on the Lannister left like Tywin wanted, leaving him open to be flanked and routed would've been the way to do it. He survived with his army in tact, which argues he did his job. To tie down the Lannister force while Robb relieved Riverrun. I don't think Roose was directly plotting treason until he got to Harrenhal. 

 

Roose was a distraction, and he could achived his objectives without engaging Tywin, the moment he was saw by the scouts. Instead of retreating or staying put he went on to seek battle and lost so one sided barely inflicting any casualities on Tywin's force. Had Roose delayed the action Tywin would get knews of the siege of Riverrun and would try to rescue it without sucess.

 

1 hour ago, Lord Lannister said:

In regards to either of these situations, what is Jon going to do? The northerners in the Golden Fork army aren't going to willingly serve under a 14 year old baseborn boy when more experienced commanders are available. If Robb gave that order, they'd start questioning him more than they already were.

like I said, the place Jon could make the biggest difference is at Winterfell. But I do think that any other aproach to the GF would be better. Roose throwed away more than a 1/3 of his army without inflicting any significant damage.

 

1 hour ago, Lord Lannister said:

ou could argue either way if he would've fallen for Theon's ruse or not, I suppose. A more experienced man in Rodrik did, but Jon showed he had decent tactical instincts at the Wall. That might be your best place for Jon to make a difference, though Catelyn would pitch a fit at Jon Snow acting as de facto Lord of Winterfell. 

Rodrik was awful at handling the North. The whole Ramsey fiasco is on him. He send Donella to her castle despite being warned that Ramsey was threatining her and was gathering a force at the Dreadfort, his intervention a the confront between the Manderlys and the Boltons was awful as he then killed the men he belived to be Ramsey, but spared a nobody soldier...Then he leaves Winterfell unguarded to relief a siege of a ruin and went on to trust the Boltons (who he belived he killed their lord in command) and was caught of guard and destroyed...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

Roose was a distraction, and he could achived his objectives without engaging Tywin, the moment he was saw by the scouts. Instead of retreating or staying put he went on to seek battle and lost so one sided barely inflicting any casualities on Tywin's force. Had Roose delayed the action Tywin would get knews of the siege of Riverrun and would try to rescue it without sucess.

like I said, the place Jon could make the biggest difference is at Winterfell. But I do think that any other aproach to the GF would be better. Roose throwed away more than a 1/3 of his army without inflicting any significant damage.

Rodrik was awful at handling the North. The whole Ramsey fiasco is on him. He send Donella to her castle despite being warned that Ramsey was threatining her and was gathering a force at the Dreadfort, his intervention a the confront between the Manderlys and the Boltons was awful as he then killed the men he belived to be Ramsey, but spared a nobody soldier...Then he leaves Winterfell unguarded to relief a siege of a ruin and went on to trust the Boltons (who he belived he killed their lord in command) and was caught of guard and destroyed...

I suppose the conversation about when Roose turned his cloak exactly would be worth having. I still think him offering battle at the Green Fork wasn't out right treason. Robb expected there to be a fight and even considered letting Umber take command. I suppose that could be attributed as much to the medieval mindset that they had to offer battle to tie down Tywin's army. But overall neither here nor there on this topic of conversation as Jon's influence would be minimal regarding the Green Fork battle.

Now that you got me thinking about it, Jon as castellan of Winterfell might be a very interesting place to put him. Catelyn wouldn't be around to object initially. Jon could be in charge with Luwin and Rodrik advising him. It very well can't go much worse than it did under Rodrik's command at any rate. I'd like to think Jon would offer to protect Lady Hornwood and take the threat of the Boltons a bit more seriously. Though his political instincts were cut from the same cloth as Robb's so who knows? But his military instincts were fine, and the more I think on it, the more I don't think he'd be taken in by Theon's feint to the south. Or at least completely strip Winterfell's defenses in the process of responding to it when he had more men available to be called in from elsewhere.

That wouldn't stop the Red Wedding or any of Robb's follies, but having Bran and Rickon alive would keep the Northern Kingdom a going concern even after everything goes wrong in the South. Bran may well find another reason to go north however at the urging of the Reeds and of course the Boltons and Karstarks are both next door and hostile. So it wouldn't be an easy time for Jon to keep Winterfell safe, but he probably wouldn't be alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Van Gogh said:

This

This what? I’m not asking for quotes or anything but Whenever you all point to Jon being a bad politician or a strategist everyone just pats each other on the back like it’s a done deal. 
 

ive pointed out plenty of instances where we see jons ability to rally men, martial prowess, or intelligence. Give me something to actually work on. 
 

Also to everyone who seems to have forgotten Jon didn’t say the NW oath as soon as he came to the wall. Throughout game of thrones he laments how much it sucks there and how it would be cool to go back but he can’t cause Catelyn. 

Also everyone seems to be downplaying theons roll as a sort of advisor to Robb, he was probably the one to convince Robb that he should treat with his father and Catelyn notes multiple times a “knowing smile” from Theon, which could mean a bunch of things and one of them would be that he has had a hand in Robs decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, The Hoare said:

They don't care about Stannis, but they care about the Starks,

  Reveal hidden contents

"Winter is almost upon us, boy. And winter is death. I would sooner my men die fighting for the Ned's little girl than alone and hungry in the snow, weeping tears that freeze upon their cheeks. No one sings songs of men who die like that. As for me, I am old. This will be my last winter. Let me bathe in Bolton blood before I die. I want to feel it spatter across my face when my axe bites deep into a Bolton skull. I want to lick it off my lips and die with the taste of it on my tongue."

"Aye!" shouted Morgan Liddle. "Blood and battle!" Then all the hillmen were shouting, banging their cups and drinking horns on the table, filling the king's tent with the clangor.

 

He got stabbed because he wasn't a good politician. If you can't deal with shortsighted subordinates you're not a good leader at all.

The part of the bigger picture is debatable,

The bigger picture would be humans including wildlings versus the scary ice demons, you can’t get much bigger picture than that or unless you side with with the nw officers that they should feed the armies of the dead you do you.

 

being a good politician and a good leader are two very different things in this universe. Varys and littlefinger are good politicians but they’re not leaders, there’s nothing about either of them that inspires people to fallow them or bring much lots loyalty.
 

up until the pink letter Jon Kinda had it to where non of the conspirators could touch him without inciting awful drawbacks, he won the bid for lord commander after all in no small part by being a warrior who lead the defense against the wildlings while a steward was busy falling for obvious feints.

 

idk how pointing out the north loving the starks over stannis helps your case. In fact it doesn’t, it proves that Jon’s advice is what gained northern support for stannis and if thats not good politicking quite honestly I don’t think you know what it would look like.

jons flaw btw is that he loved his family more than his honor which was neds fault and it was in some ways Catelyn fault and most people give one or both of them the pass so I don’t see why the same consideration can’t be given to Jon 

Share this post


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

Now that you got me thinking about it, Jon as castellan of Winterfell might be a very interesting place to put him. Catelyn wouldn't be around to object initially. Jon could be in charge with Luwin and Rodrik advising him. It very well can't go much worse than it did under Rodrik's command at any rate. I'd like to think Jon would offer to protect Lady Hornwood and take the threat of the Boltons a bit more seriously. Though his political instincts were cut from the same cloth as Robb's so who knows? But his military instincts were fine, and the more I think on it, the more I don't think he'd be taken in by Theon's feint to the south. Or at least completely strip Winterfell's defenses in the process of responding to it when he had more men available to be called in from elsewhere.

 

We share the same opinion here. Rodrik couldn't make it worse even if he wanted. Jon at the very least seems capable of some leadership, he knows Winterfell and unlike Rodrik he received the same education that Robb and was more focused and less optimistic than his brother.

2 hours ago, Lord Lannister said:

That wouldn't stop the Red Wedding or any of Robb's follies, but having Bran and Rickon alive would keep the Northern Kingdom a going concern even after everything goes wrong in the South. Bran may well find another reason to go north however at the urging of the Reeds and of course the Boltons and Karstarks are both next door and hostile. So it wouldn't be an easy time for Jon to keep Winterfell safe, but he probably wouldn't be alone.

I belive it would

The fall of Winterfell is the first domino to fall that leads to Robb's death.

Robb at least as he tell us, only sleeps with Jeyne on his grief. Winterfell does not fall > Robb does not grief> does not sleep with Jeyne> does not marries her> does not break his promise to the freys

Wintefell does not fall > Catelyn does not get mad on grief > does not free Jaime> does not piss of Karstarks> Robb's camp remains united at least for some time.

Share this post


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

I belive it would

The fall of Winterfell is the first domino to fall that leads to Robb's death.

Robb at least as he tell us, only sleeps with Jeyne on his grief. Winterfell does not fall > Robb does not grief> does not sleep with Jeyne> does not marries her> does not break his promise to the freys

Wintefell does not fall > Catelyn does not get mad on grief > does not free Jaime> does not piss of Karstarks> Robb's camp remains united at least for some time.

That's an interesting point you make, that I had not considered. I'm not so sure it applies to Robb sleeping with Jeyne though. I always thought the grief was just an excuse to cover up the real reason that they were both young and horny. 

Catelyn on the other hand definitely acted on grief as much as anything else when she set Jaime free. So that might be an interesting change. Even if the Freys were on board and pushing for it, Tywin wouldn't dare sign off on the Red Wedding while Jaime was a prisoner I guess it's possible that Catelyn could lose her perspective if she learned Bran left north with the Reeds or something (She'd definitely be quick to blame Jon for that I'm sure) and free Jaime then. 

The more I think on this, the more interesting I find it how much this might have changed things if Jon had stayed at Winterfell. I don't think it would save Robb's cause in the end, but it might be a less vicious end for him and definitely draw the matter out.

Share this post


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

That's an interesting point you make, that I had not considered. I'm not so sure it applies to Robb sleeping with Jeyne though. I always thought the grief was just an excuse to cover up the real reason that they were both young and horny. 

 

Why the grief was only excuse for Robb but not Catelyn?

Robb is less mature than Catelyn, he probably feel even more guilty since he was the one that send Theon.

Share this post


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

Why the grief was only excuse for Robb but not Catelyn?

Robb is less mature than Catelyn, he probably feel even more guilty since he was the one that send Theon.

I mean the next paragraph you cut out of my quote opened with stating Catelyn acted out of grief. They definitely had their respective moments of pain. I just don't think that was the primary reason for Robb jumping into bed with Jeyne. It seemed an excuse Robb seized upon that he knew his mother would be sympathetic to. Since she did something equally rash for the same reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

I mean the next paragraph you cut out of my quote opened with stating Catelyn acted out of grief. They definitely had their respective moments of pain. I just don't think that was the primary reason for Robb jumping into bed with Jeyne. It seemed an excuse Robb seized upon that he knew his mother would be sympathetic to. Since she did something equally rash for the same reason.

Fair enough. I just don't see the books giving us any othe cause for his actions, and therefor I tend to belive that it is the true reason,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Arthur Peres said:

Fair enough. I just don't see the books giving us any othe cause for his actions, and therefor I tend to belive that it is the true reason,

It's open for interpretation and as we never get a Robb POV we won't know for sure. I just see a teenage boy that knows he screwed up putting the best face on it when facing his mother. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Some here suggest Jon lacks political talent. Considering how skillfully he played with Stannis and the wildings and the fact he still seemed to be quite popular among most of NW at the time he was murdered I'd say it is just the opposite. He's even too good for an unexperienced teenager IMO, I do not think practice ground or adventure beyond the wall are things which may taught one politics.

Sometimes there is no perfect way, no matter what you do. I do not think being stabbed automatically means one is bad politician. This would mean Julius Caesar was bad one, risky statement.

After all his instinct did not fail him as he came to an agreement with Stannis, so in the end the red witch may resurrect him. If he opposed the king... I doubt if Marsh would have been able to stitch Jon's head down to his neck ;-)

Anyway, I do not think Jon's advice could have helped Robb much, even if he was real genius. At best Robb would have made him one of his advisors, close to his heart but not most important one.

Edited by broken one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/16/2020 at 12:25 PM, The Hoare said:

Jon was neither a talented strategist nor a good politician. He would be given a place on Robb's personal guard and that's all

Jon did a piss poor job of communicating with his black brothers at the wall.  A battle commander he won't be.  Personal guard to Robb sounds about right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/16/2020 at 7:58 AM, frenin said:

The only realistic thing Jon could've prevented is Theon being sent to the Iron Islands, which is not a small thing remove Theon's betrayal and Robb still breathes atthe end of ADWD, but not even that is certain.

Besides that, what more could've offered a 14 year old bastard?? He's not great tactician like his older brother, he's not fearless or great a warriorso he can't endear anyone with feats at arms, nor is he a kid that inspires that much loyalty like Robb does. 

That's 15-16 year old Jon,  AGOT Jon was not that at all, nor was he trained like Robb was by Ned.

It's not safe to say. As in, Jon is not as good as Robb. Neither Robb and Jon received the same education, as it's obvious that Brandon and Ned did not receive the same education. Robb was born to lead and rule and you can see that plain enough from the day he calls his banners. Jon was born a bastard, they did received the same education at arms however.

It's actually specifically mentioned that Robb and Jon got the same education and training in arms. Ned might have given Robb more specific lessons in ruling as he was the heir apparent, but Jon does fairly well running the wall and advising Stannis when given the chance.

That said, Jon's presence likely would not have done much of anything to the overall end game. Robb might be alive but the IB are still going to invade the North and Robb's gonna lose the war.

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...