What if Tywin killed in early part of war of five kings

[Mrstrategy]

What if Tywin killed or at least gravely injured so he out for at least 6, months to a year in early part of war of five kings   (before or during 
Battle on the Green Fork ) by a random arrow/crossbow bolt?how would it affect  war of five kings?

[Nathan Stark]

Goodbye Joffrey, Cersei, Jaime, Tyrion. Y'all dead. It's a Civil War between Renly and Stannis, and the North most definately would back Stannis. 

[sifth]

Kevan Lannister would have just taken his place. He basically is just as smart as Tywin and commands the same level of respect from the lords of the west. Now if Kevan died as well, things would get really interesting.

[The Hoare]

Stannis get the Iron Throne. Without Tywin I doubt the Tyrells would back the Lannisters.

4 hours ago, sifth said:

Kevan Lannister would have just taken his place. He basically is just as smart as Tywin and commands the same level of respect from the lords of the west. Now if Kevan died as well, things would get really interesting.

Or maybe Kevan would just mourn Tywin's death like he did in the books.

[sifth]

4 minutes ago, The Hoare said:

 

Or maybe Kevan would just mourn Tywin's death like he did in the books.

I doubt he would in the field, surrounded by enemies and in the middle of a war no less. Kevan Lannister was always a man of duty and he does eventually take Tywin's place in the real story, he just doesn't do it right away, because he believed the war was about to end.

[The Hoare]

2 hours ago, sifth said:

Kevan Lannister was always a man of duty and he does eventually take Tywin's place in the real story, he just doesn't do it right away, because he believed the war was about to end

He took Tywin's place only after Pycelle and Harys Swyft asked him to come back to KL

[Bernie Mac]

11 hours ago, The Hoare said:

Without Tywin I doubt the Tyrells would back the Lannisters

They backed the Lannisters because of the Crown, not because of Tywin. It is just as possible that without Tywin they'd be more enthusiastic to make the deal, given an even greater chance to secure a larger part of power.

 

11 hours ago, The Hoare said:

 

Or maybe Kevan would just mourn Tywin's death like he did in the books.

Not exactly. Kevan was more than prepared to step into Tywin's shoes, but he wanted Cersei removed from the children and Kings Landing, like Tywin had planned at the end of ASOS.

Kevan had not just lost Tywin, but one son and another on his deathbed. Lancel revealed his relationship with Cersei and this is part of the reason why Kevan leaves.

Also, and this is pretty pertinent, the war was pretty much over when Kevan left. His reasons to stick around had decreased.

[Arthur Peres]

The Lannisters only survived after AGoT because of Tywin's reputation. Remove him and everything is over for them.

At this point Renly is crowed King with the Tyrells at his side, Robb just beat and captured Jaime and Kevan son.

Without Tywin's authority, Cersei would never reconize Tyrion as acting Hand, without Tyrion KL is controlled by Cersei and Joffrey... I doubt that this would go well. Without Tyrion Stannis might (probably would) take KL and end the war.

With Tywin's death, even more problems arise, like who is his heir... Tywin cleary meant to be Jaime, but he is captured and a member of the KG, then Tyrion a dwarf, and Cersei a woman acused of adultery and incest that is far away from the lords and region. They both hate each other, and I doubt that they would have the authority over their vassals that Tywin had. Kevan is not ambitious enough to usurp his nephew and niece, and  he does not have the same authority over them that Tywin had. Just look how he is treated by Cersei in Feast and Dance.

There are even worst odds. Balon was cleary afraid of Tywin, and rejected Robb and stabbed him in the back, but if Tywin is dead and the Westerlands are ruled by a Dwarf or a Woman, would he respect them all the same? I doubt it. He called Robb a puppy, but if this puppy just killed Tywin and captured the KG he might be a Hungry Wolf.

Tywin's death also triggered a bunch of events of it's own much later, The GC and Doran only started to acted after his death.

[nyser1]

This could warrant a rather extensive answer. However, to be more concise, I think it is fair to say that Tywin was the engine keeping Lannister hegemony going.

Tywin falls, everything starts to fall apart as we see in the actual story. So if he falls earlier, so do the Lannisters. I 

[Terrorthatflapsinthenight9]

Tywin's loss would have been a crushing blow to the Lannisters, without him the Lannisters would fall to infighting and chaos with Cersei and Joffrey being the ones making the big decisions and Tyrion and Kevan being unable of fully reining them in. 

It's very likely that the alliance with the Tyrells wouldn't happen and that the Lannisters would be defeated by Robb while King's Landing and the Iron Throne would fall to Stannis.

[WhatAnArtist!]

People saying that the Lannister cause would be doomed because there'd be no one to keep Cersei and Joffrey in check fail to remember that Cersei and Joffrey had practically no Lannister/westerlands soldiers in King's Landing; all of them were fighting in the west under the command of Tywin and his relatives and bannermen. Cersei isn't the only Lannister with influence. Ser Kevan, Ser Stafford and Ser Devan are all Lannisters that have command of armies and worked in proximity with Tywin. They'd be perfectly capable of continuing the war without Tywin and doing what he did in Clash, i.e. marching east and linking up with the Tyrell army to save King's Landing. Edmure would still make the same "mistake" in rebuffing the Lannister armies, so they wouldn't be cut off from the capital like Robb wanted. 

Now, people have rightly pointed out that Tyrion wouldn't be able to do anything in King's Landing because Cersei wouldn't accept him as Hand because he wouldn't have Tywin's authority. That's a problem. However, it's likely that Tyrion would then ride west to join up with Ser Kevan and the westerlands armies. Tyrion would now be the de jure Lord of Casterly Rock, since Jaime's vows and imprisonment have disqualified him. Ser Kevan did not hate Tyrion like Tywin did, and I assume that he would accept Tyrion as his rightful lord. A Lannister cause run by the team of Tyrion and Kevan would do well; they'd make good decisions and stand a decent chance of continuing the war. 

Worst case scenario and King's Landing falls to Stannis and Cersei and her children are executed, that still leaves the entire might of the westerlands armies in the field - the city was defended by gold cloaks, not red cloaks. Now, the Lannisters can either sue for peace and recognise Stannis as the rightful king, since there are no other Baratheons left anymore (real or fake), or they can continue the fight purely for the sake of Lannister power and survival. I find it hard to imagine they'd sue for peace, since Stannis would likely execute all of the leading Lannisters due to their part in the war. This leaves continued war.

Stannis's army wouldn't be large enough to defend against a counter-attack by Tyrion and Kevan leading the might of the westerlands armies against the city, even without Tyrell support (the Tyrells would probably slink back to the Reach and stay there, waiting to see what happens). Stannis is a better commander than Kevan and Tyrion, but sheer numbers would probably win the Lannisters the day - the city couldn't survive a long siege, since it was already starving before the Battle of Blackwater.

With Stannis defeated, the Lannisters would be back in control of King's Landing. The awkward situation would then arise as to who would be the next king. "Robert's" children are dead, as is Renly. The only legal option would be Stannis, who was just defeated by the Lannisters. Tyrion and Kevan have to just choose a new king, whoever they wanted (obviously a Lannister). This would essentially put them in the position that the rebels were in after defeating the Targaryens and taking King's Landing 15 years earlier.

[BlackLightning]

4 hours ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

People saying that the Lannister cause would be doomed because there'd be no one to keep Cersei and Joffrey in check fail to remember that Cersei and Joffrey had practically no Lannister/westerlands soldiers in King's Landing; all of them were fighting in the west under the command of Tywin and his relatives and bannermen. Cersei isn't the only Lannister with influence. Ser Kevan, Ser Stafford and Ser Devan are all Lannisters that have command of armies and worked in proximity with Tywin. They'd be perfectly capable of continuing the war without Tywin and doing what he did in Clash, i.e. marching east and linking up with the Tyrell army to save King's Landing. Edmure would still make the same "mistake" in rebuffing the Lannister armies, so they wouldn't be cut off from the capital like Robb wanted. 

Now, people have rightly pointed out that Tyrion wouldn't be able to do anything in King's Landing because Cersei wouldn't accept him as Hand because he wouldn't have Tywin's authority. That's a problem. However, it's likely that Tyrion would then ride west to join up with Ser Kevan and the westerlands armies. Tyrion would now be the de jure Lord of Casterly Rock, since Jaime's vows and imprisonment have disqualified him. Ser Kevan did not hate Tyrion like Tywin did, and I assume that he would accept Tyrion as his rightful lord. A Lannister cause run by the team of Tyrion and Kevan would do well; they'd make good decisions and stand a decent chance of continuing the war. 

Worst case scenario and King's Landing falls to Stannis and Cersei and her children are executed, that still leaves the entire might of the westerlands armies in the field - the city was defended by gold cloaks, not red cloaks. Now, the Lannisters can either sue for peace and recognise Stannis as the rightful king, since there are no other Baratheons left anymore (real or fake), or they can continue the fight purely for the sake of Lannister power and survival. I find it hard to imagine they'd sue for peace, since Stannis would likely execute all of the leading Lannisters due to their part in the war. This leaves continued war.

Stannis's army wouldn't be large enough to defend against a counter-attack by Tyrion and Kevan leading the might of the westerlands armies against the city, even without Tyrell support (the Tyrells would probably slink back to the Reach and stay there, waiting to see what happens). Stannis is a better commander than Kevan and Tyrion, but sheer numbers would probably win the Lannisters the day - the city couldn't survive a long siege, since it was already starving before the Battle of Blackwater.

With Stannis defeated, the Lannisters would be back in control of King's Landing. The awkward situation would then arise as to who would be the next king. "Robert's" children are dead, as is Renly. The only legal option would be Stannis, who was just defeated by the Lannisters. Tyrion and Kevan have to just choose a new king, whoever they wanted (obviously a Lannister). This would essentially put them in the position that the rebels were in after defeating the Targaryens and taking King's Landing 15 years earlier.

All good points.

But you are forgetting Balon Greyjoy and Robb Stark.

I doubt Robb Stark is going to just let the Lannisters overthrow/execute Stannis and retake King's Landing. Not in light of Sansa being a hostage of Stannis Baratheon.

[WhatAnArtist!]

11 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

All good points.

But you are forgetting Balon Greyjoy and Robb Stark.

I doubt Robb Stark is going to just let the Lannisters overthrow/execute Stannis and retake King's Landing. Not in light of Sansa being a hostage of Stannis Baratheon.

My hypotheticals were based on the assumption that the ironborn still invaded the North in Clash, which means that Robb would still decide to march back north during Storm, leaving only the riverlords to defend the riverlands. Keep in mind, Robb decided to do this in canon after Stannis had been defeated, King's Landing had been saved and the Lannisters and Tyrells become allies. The situation in the south was already a disaster in the real timeline, and Robb still decided to go north.

I don't see what difference it'd make if Sansa was a hostage of the Lannisters or Stannis. Robb had already decided that he wasn't going to end the war because of this.

[The Jingo]

17 hours ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

People saying that the Lannister cause would be doomed because there'd be no one to keep Cersei and Joffrey in check fail to remember that Cersei and Joffrey had practically no Lannister/westerlands soldiers in King's Landing; all of them were fighting in the west under the command of Tywin and his relatives and bannermen. Cersei isn't the only Lannister with influence. Ser Kevan, Ser Stafford and Ser Devan are all Lannisters that have command of armies and worked in proximity with Tywin. They'd be perfectly capable of continuing the war without Tywin and doing what he did in Clash, i.e. marching east and linking up with the Tyrell army to save King's Landing. Edmure would still make the same "mistake" in rebuffing the Lannister armies, so they wouldn't be cut off from the capital like Robb wanted. 

Now, people have rightly pointed out that Tyrion wouldn't be able to do anything in King's Landing because Cersei wouldn't accept him as Hand because he wouldn't have Tywin's authority. That's a problem. However, it's likely that Tyrion would then ride west to join up with Ser Kevan and the westerlands armies. Tyrion would now be the de jure Lord of Casterly Rock, since Jaime's vows and imprisonment have disqualified him. Ser Kevan did not hate Tyrion like Tywin did, and I assume that he would accept Tyrion as his rightful lord. A Lannister cause run by the team of Tyrion and Kevan would do well; they'd make good decisions and stand a decent chance of continuing the 

The collapse of the Lannisters post Tywin has less to do with military weakness and more to do with the fact that the rest of them are various shades of incompetent and unable to cooperate.

 If Tywin died or was laid up Cersei would probably kill Tyrion almost as soon as he showed up in King's Landing. She certainly wouldn't work with him and would obstruct him at all opportunity without fear of Tywin's backing.

[WhatAnArtist!]

10 minutes ago, The Jingo said:

 If Tywin died or was laid up Cersei would probably kill Tyrion almost as soon as he showed up in King's Landing. She certainly wouldn't work with him and would obstruct him at all opportunity without fear of Tywin's backing.

OP specified that Tywin would die before or during the Battle of the Green Fork, which occurred before he commanded Tyrion to go to King's Landing. Tyrion would not have gone to King's Landing if Tywin hadn't have ordered him to.

[The Jingo]

7 hours ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

OP specified that Tywin would die before or during the Battle of the Green Fork, which occurred before he commanded Tyrion to go to King's Landing. Tyrion would not have gone to King's Landing if Tywin hadn't have ordered him to.

Tyrion still might have chosen to go on his own or at the urging of Kevan. In both cases Cersei either kills him or ignores him, leading to Stannis taking the city and ending the Lannister claim. 

[BlackLightning]

9 hours ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

My hypotheticals were based on the assumption that the ironborn still invaded the North in Clash, which means that Robb would still decide to march back north during Storm, leaving only the riverlords to defend the riverlands. Keep in mind, Robb decided to do this in canon after Stannis had been defeated, King's Landing had been saved and the Lannisters and Tyrells become allies. The situation in the south was already a disaster in the real timeline, and Robb still decided to go north.

I don't see what difference it'd make if Sansa was a hostage of the Lannisters or Stannis. Robb had already decided that he wasn't going to end the war because of this.

But in your scenario, Stannis takes King's Landing and sits the Iron Throne for a time before Tyrion and Kevan are able to attack the city and throw him onto the chopping block.

And  your scenario also operates under the unclear that Tywin Lannister had been captured or killed by Robb Stark. Which opens up another can of issues: Robb is more likely to hold Tywin hostage. So, the Lannisters have a lot to loose should Stannis and Robb become allies--and they are natural allies. They share a common enemy and have no real axe to grind against each other.

And what's preventing Balon Greyjoy from attacking the Westerlands if Tywin died in A Game of Thrones. The Westerlands are closer and richer than the North and there's no boogieman (re: Tywin) that would give Balon Greyjoy pause.

[WhatAnArtist!]

2 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

But in your scenario, Stannis takes King's Landing and sits the Iron Throne for a time before Tyrion and Kevan are able to attack the city and throw him onto the chopping block.

Yes, and...? What's your point? This wouldn't change anything between Robb and Stannis. Robb would still refuse to give up his crown and the North's independence, and Stannis would still refuse to acknowledge Robb as the King in the North. Robb knew that Stannis was the rightful king, and still refused to bend the knee to him in Thrones/Clash.

5 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

And  your scenario also operates under the unclear that Tywin Lannister had been captured or killed by Robb Stark. Which opens up another can of issues: Robb is more likely to hold Tywin hostage. So, the Lannisters have a lot to loose should Stannis and Robb become allies--and they are natural allies. They share a common enemy and have no real axe to grind against each other.

I'm not the OP, I didn't start this hypothetical situation, I merely added my own predictions as to what would happen after Tywin died. Neither OP nor I specified in what way he died, merely the when. You're right that Robb would do everything possible to capture Tywin alive, but that's beside the point for this hypothetical discussion.

6 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

And what's preventing Balon Greyjoy from attacking the Westerlands if Tywin died in A Game of Thrones. The Westerlands are closer and richer than the North and there's no boogieman (re: Tywin) that would give Balon Greyjoy pause.

That's true, but there's still other reasons to avoid attacking the Westerlands, like how it's much smaller and more densely populated than the North, and thus harder to mount surpise attacks, and the bulk of the Lannister forces were relatively close and would be able to counter-attack quickly, unlike in the North.

[frenin]

On 11/8/2021 at 2:13 PM, WhatAnArtist! said:

Stannis's army wouldn't be large enough to defend against a counter-attack by Tyrion and Kevan leading the might of the westerlands armies against the city

I don't know that's a given. The Westerlands were pretty bloodied and without Tyrion in King's Landing, the city doesn't stand a chance. 

The numbers should be pretty even and given that the Lannisters should be the ones going to attack... Their victory seems unlikely.

You're also assuming that after taking King's Landing, the rest of the Great Lords wouldn't just declare for Stannis, which is honestly the likely option.

Renly also may not even die and rush to King's Landing with Tywin's death...

 

On 11/8/2021 at 2:13 PM, WhatAnArtist! said:

This would essentially put them in the position that the rebels were in after defeating the Targaryens and taking King's Landing 15 years earlier.

The rebels had a loosely legal claimant and a massive coalition to shut dissent. The same is not true for the Lannisters. With what power and claim are they hoping to subdue the rest of the kingdoms who obviously wouldn't accept them as rulers?

 

 

9 hours ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

Keep in mind, Robb decided to do this in canon after Stannis had been defeated, King's Landing had been saved and the Lannisters and Tyrells become allies. The situation in the south was already a disaster in the real timeline, and Robb still decided to go north.

That's why Robb wouldn't go North... The situation in the South was untenable and he needed to lose his base of power if he ever wanted to have a chance. Stannis taking King's Landing offers him vast opportunities.

For starters, he only decides to go North after Balon's death, since that meant most of the Ironborn went home for the Kingsmoot. There's no logical reason for Robb not to finish up the Lannisters, then either making his peace with Stannis (unlikely but there's always the possibility) or simply marching North.

In fact, with Tywin dead... Does Robb even have the need to ally himself with the Ironborn and or sent Theon?? 

29 minutes ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

Robb knew that Stannis was the rightful king, and still refused to bend the knee to him in Thrones/Clash.

Never happened, Cat never told him and Robb had no more reason to trust Stannis's word than he had to trust Cersei's regarding Robert's kids.

Irregardless, even if Robb wouldn't bent the knee, he would certainly use the opportunity to attack the Lannisters. He tried an alliance with Renly anyway.

 

 

 

29 minutes ago, WhatAnArtist! said:

That's true, but there's still other reasons to avoid attacking the Westerlands, like how it's much smaller and more densely populated than the North, and thus harder to mount surpise attacks, and the bulk of the Lannister forces were relatively close and would be able to counter-attack quickly, unlike in the North.

The reason why Balon chose to attack the North, besides petty revenge, was him fearing Tywin and underestimating Robb.

And after Oxcross and the Westerlands's army effectively trapped in the Riverlands. The Westerlands are as unprotected as the North is.

 

[Darth Sidious]

The outcome will be better for the Starks if Tywin had died earlier.