Angel Eyes Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 So this is built from a post by @CamiloRP on the Tywin was a Pretty Bad Player thread. The original post: Quote There's also a huge mistake by Tywin that you missed @Alyn Oakenfist he killed Robb. When Brynden Rivers ended the second Blackfyre rebellion he took Daemon II prisoner. By keeping him alive he made sure no Blackfyre could claim the throne, as he came before any of them. Tywin should've done the same with Robb. By killing Robb he passes the lordship/kingship to his heir, and every Northerner save the Boltons and maybe the Dustins/Ryswells would follow that heir. By keeping Robb hostage no one would be able to unite the North in his name, as Robb would be the legitimate king, and no northerner would dare defy Tywin less they want Robb killed. A captured Robb could even bend the knee and confirm Tyrion and Sansa's son as his heir. Basically, could Tywin have neutralized the Northern cause by capturing Robb instead of killing him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saltedmalted Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 53 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said: By killing Robb he passes the lordship/kingship to his heir, and every Northerner save the Boltons and maybe the Dustins/Ryswells would follow that heir. Robb's heir was Sansa who was going to be a Lannister broodmare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trigger Warning Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 This is assuming that Walder and Roose have no say at the negotiation table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Stark Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 The Red Wedding as a whole was an unneccesary war crime. Robb at that point was pretty much beaten in the South. Tywin only set up the Red Wedding because he wanted to utterly destroy the Starks, not merely defeat them. Robb humiliated the mighty Tywin Lannister, and he wanted to get back at the Young Wolf by annihilating him completely. And he got to use the Freys as disposable assets because that's just how Tywin rolls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CamiloRP Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 54 minutes ago, saltedmalted said: Robb's heir was Sansa who was going to be a Lannister broodmare. Except that she was disowned, so now there are Manderlys plotting to name Rickon lord, while Stanis plans to name Jon and LF allegedly plans to name Sansa lady, none of this could happen if Robb was alive. 1 hour ago, Angel Eyes said: So this is built from a post by @CamiloRP on the Tywin was a Pretty Bad Player thread. The original post: Basically, could Tywin have neutralized the Northern cause by capturing Robb instead of killing him. <3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groo Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 13 minutes ago, Nathan Stark said: The Red Wedding as a whole was an unneccesary war crime. Robb at that point was pretty much beaten in the South. Tywin only set up the Red Wedding because he wanted to utterly destroy the Starks, not merely defeat them. Robb humiliated the mighty Tywin Lannister, and he wanted to get back at the Young Wolf by annihilating him completely. And he got to use the Freys as disposable assets because that's just how Tywin rolls. I agree. I also think Tywin thought having Sansa was enough to get control of the North. But to answer the original question of the thread, I do think capturing Robb would have neutralized the North. @Trigger Warning is right though. Keeping Robb alive didn't suit Bolton's agenda. It didn't suit Walder's desire for revenge and, as you've pointed out, it didn't suit Tywin's desires and personality. In theory it could have worked but it wasn't going to go down that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saltedmalted Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 4 minutes ago, CamiloRP said: Except that she was disowned, so now there are Manderlys plotting to name Rickon lord, while Stanis plans to name Jon and LF allegedly plans to name Sansa lady, none of this could happen if Robb was alive. Nobody other than a few people even know of it. The Lannisters didn't care about that either. If Sansa is disinherited then Robb is heirless. 4 minutes ago, Groo said: Keeping Robb alive didn't suit Bolton's agenda. It didn't suit Walder's desire for revenge and, as you've pointed out, True. Bolton and Frey were doing the plotting. the Lannisters were only going to support them once they had done the deed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPTWP Timett Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 Holding Ned and his sister's didn't stop Robb why would holding him stop whoever is next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Stark Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 39 minutes ago, TPTWP Timett said: Holding Ned and his sister's didn't stop Robb why would holding him stop whoever is next? They'd be risking their own Kings life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPTWP Timett Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 7 hours ago, Nathan Stark said: They'd be risking their own Kings life. They risked their liege and his daughters does the title king really make a difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CamiloRP Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 11 hours ago, saltedmalted said: Nobody other than a few people even know of it. The Lannisters didn't care about that either. If Sansa is disinherited then Robb is heirless. Except there's Jon, or the Karstarks or any number of people who can pick up the crown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay21 Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 I think it's a cleaner start for Roose as Warden in the North to have Robb out of the way and out of the equation. If Robb's locked up somewhere then Roose' power partially derives from the ability to kill him or release him and he would constantly be bargaining on that point. If it's not even Roose' power because Robb's held by the Freys or the Lannisters then he's really just a governor on their behalf. Either way Roose rules the north knowing that he's his subjects' second choice and given the chance they would throw him over. If his house were to survive this generation as wardens in the north with Robb out of the way and no Stark heirs, then time will normalize that relationship. I believe Bloodraven's strategy made sense because of the Aegon the Unworthy factor which meant that there was an unknown number of potential claimants and pretenders. Robb's got far fewer heirs and a complete list of them can be made and they can all be put under Roose' thumb. I can't help but think that if Bloodraven had the means he would have wiped out every single Blackfyre or would be Blackfyre but he knew this would be beyond him so using Daemon II as a capstone was his next best choice. Anyway, unless Aegon VI really is who he thinks he is, Illyrio and Varys' plans shows that Bloodraven's strategy only worked for so long. If Roose and the Lannisters dot their i's and cross their t's there will never be a believable Stark pretender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.