Jump to content

What were really the chances of success for Viserys or Daenerys if the original plan with Khal Drogo had come to fruition ?


Recommended Posts

Just now, Hugorfonics said:

They're there for quick raids and to spread terror and absolutism. Like dragons. 

The issue is that a lot of the Dothraki might not land in the first place. And raids would only serve to turn the populace against the Targaryens. Yes, most likely Lysa won't fight, but the Dothraki can't reach her either. Another problem is that the Dothraki can't be used in a controlled and precise manner like the dragons. The dragons were only attacking who the riders wanted them to, the Dothraki will most likely attack and raid indiscriminately, especially if Viserys, someone who they have no respect for, is the figurehead of the invasion. 

Linking up with the golden company would probably grant them more success, but I'm still not sure if it would be enough to win. It also brings additional PR issues.

Dothraki and GC working together properly would require the Dothraki to follow orders from Westerosi commanders, something they would probably be unwilling to do. They seem very prideful to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

The issue is that a lot of the Dothraki might not land in the first place

Why not?

14 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

And raids would only serve to turn the populace against the Targaryens

I don't think much more then against any other kingdom. Ironborn are always raiding, so is Dorne and the Reach, in peace times. Granted the pushback from the community in the Riverlands, mainly against Lannister, carries substance but that's more to do with the magical leadership of Beric and later Catelyn.

19 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Yes, most likely Lysa won't fight, but the Dothraki can't reach her either.

They can starve her like the lords declarant do, but if she's neutral then there's no need for hostility.

22 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Another problem is that the Dothraki can't be used in a controlled and precise manner like the dragons. The dragons were only attacking who the riders wanted them to, the Dothraki will most likely attack and raid indiscriminately, especially if Viserys, someone who they have no respect for, is the figurehead of the invasion. 

If they respected whomever enough to cross the narrow then they can follow simple directions. Danys Dothraki under the leadership of her Bloodriders (who started off green as the sea) always preform their tasks acceptably.

25 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Linking up with the golden company would probably grant them more success, but I'm still not sure if it would be enough to win. It also brings additional PR issues.

Can't hurt. It might be a bit of bad PR but it still won't touch Lannisters twincest and stuff

26 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Dothraki and GC working together properly would require the Dothraki to follow orders from Westerosi commanders, something they would probably be unwilling to do. They seem very prideful to me.

Why couldn't they have their own commanders? Also they follow strength so like if Robb and greywind for example was leading a chance I'd think they'ld love to follow 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hugorfonics said:

Why not?

Because Stannis with the royal fleet will stop them, unless you are talking about them invading later in the story.

Just now, Hugorfonics said:

Ironborn are always raiding, so is Dorne and the Reach, in peace times.

I don't think they were raiding until after Robert died. And Dothraki are extremely brutal, even by in universe standards. People hate how brutal the sack of King's Landing was, but that seems to be standard Dothraki modus operandi.

1 minute ago, Hugorfonics said:

They can starve her like the lords declarant do, but if she's neutral then there's no need for hostility.

This requires them to get past all the other Vale fortifications in the first place, which I believe they'd find quite a challenge. The Vale has a good supply of food because it's untouched by war.

2 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

If they respected whomever enough to cross the narrow then they can follow simple directions

But the problem is that they don't respect Viserys. If Viserys is dead then it's a Drogo and Daenerys invasion, she won't have dragons because she won't have made the necessary sacrifice to hatch them so most likely they won't follow her orders either.

5 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Can't hurt. It might be a bit of bad PR but it still won't touch Lannisters twincest and stuff

But this is on top of all the negative PR from associating with Dothraki, of which there will be ample evidence, far more so than the twincest.

6 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Why couldn't they have their own commanders? Also they follow strength so like if Robb and greywind for example was leading a chance I'd think they'ld love to follow 

They could but then the attack probably wouldn't be coordinated at all, Dothraki would be off looting and raiding randomly, just doing their own thing. So they couldn't benefit from the GC's knowledge of Westeros battle strategy, terrain, siege warfare etc. for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Because Stannis with the royal fleet will stop them, unless you are talking about them invading later in the story.

I thought it was at the start of war of 5.

But if it's earlier and Stannis is mustering his forces to strike at Lannister then I don't see him impending an invasion anyway.

20 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

I don't think they were raiding until after Robert died.

The way the Sworn Sword is written makes is seem that these minor lords and their minor wars are a constant 

20 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

And Dothraki are extremely brutal, even by in universe standards. People hate how brutal the sack of King's Landing was, but that seems to be standard Dothraki modus operandi

Westerosi are brutal too. They're the type to chop off wolf heads and sew them on teenagers, kill guests cook them and serve them to their cousins. 

It's true that the real horror shows like the acts of Tywin and Hoster committed lives decades later but they all do that, and I think in these two cases it was on purpose.

I mean we see the smallfolk throw their prisoners in crow cages till they die of thirst, I don't think brutality throws people that off

30 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

But the problem is that they don't respect Viserys. If Viserys is dead then it's a Drogo and Daenerys invasion, she won't have dragons because she won't have made the necessary sacrifice to hatch them so most likely they won't follow her orders either.

So they listen to Drogo and his bloodriders 

31 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

But this is on top of all the negative PR from associating with Dothraki, of which there will be ample evidence, far more so than the twincest

I don't think so. Plus in Westeros the jerk just needs to wait until his jerky neighbor out jerks him. Like if a RW situation happens then PR gets fundamentally shifted

33 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

They could but then the attack probably wouldn't be coordinated at all, Dothraki would be off looting and raiding randomly, just doing their own thing. So they couldn't benefit from the GC's knowledge of Westeros battle strategy, terrain, siege warfare etc. for example.

They can adapt. Drogos khallasar looked professional enough, Dany studied their strategy and utilized it later in her future campaigns.

I don't see why their attacks would have to be uncoordinated 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Vale would just be one of the worst kingdoms for the Dothraki to try to invade alongside Dorne and the North. 

Dothraki surely aren't used to live and fight in mountains, which make logisticics, attacks and sieges especially difficult and hazardous, and the Vale has many very formidable castles and fortifications, starting with the Bloody Gate which has smashed countless foreigners invasions and surely foes that know siege better than the Dothraki.

And there is also the cold temperatures, and the possibility of ambush or traps in this mountainous environment and the risk of harrasement by the mountain clans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

The way the Sworn Sword is written makes is seem that these minor lords and their minor wars are a constant

That's true but they don't seem to involve Dothraki levels of brutality.

35 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

They're the type to chop off wolf heads and sew them on teenagers

That is condemned by almost everyone who knows about it, so I think it's an abnormal level of brutality.

35 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

kill guests cook them and serve them to their cousins. 

That was retaliation for the Red Wedding, which is specifically noted to not be normal levels of brutality by almost everyone.

33 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

I mean we see the smallfolk throw their prisoners in crow cages till they die of thirst, I don't think brutality throws people that off

I still think the Dothraki are more brutal. The crow cages were after months of deliberately brutal raids that Tywin intended to be really harsh and over the top. The crucial point for the Smallfolk is that the violence is inflicted by foreigners who the Targaryens have brought over.

36 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

I don't think so

The Dothraki have a reputation for being barbarians and savages. As soon as they land they will immediately justify this reputation for savagery by killing, raiding, looting etc. in front of a lot of witnesses. By comparison the evidence available to the public for the incest is weak.

39 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

I don't see why their attacks would have to be uncoordinated 

Well if the GC and Dothraki don't have unified command/command in contact with each other then they will be following different plans, attack different places and have a different strategy, they won't be as effective as they should be because the Dothraki, at least at the start will be using tactics they used in Essos while the GC uses more appropriate tactics.

44 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

They can adapt.

They can, but I think it would be quite a slow process, the Dothraki seem very prideful, by the time they realise they have to change something they could have lost a lot of men already. When they were attacking Qohor for example they just kept on charging even as the casualties were mounting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

The deal was made. The Magister didn’t get rich by making deals with people who are not going to keep it.

I don't think it's as clear as that.  The text tells us more than once that the Dothraki don't buy and sell like other cultures.  They give gifts, and sometimes they return favors, if and when the circumstances are right.  We also know that the Dothraki have a superstitious fear of the sea, and that they don't know how to fight against an armored opponent.  And I keep remembering that, by the time we met Daenerys in "Game," the Young Griff conspiracy had been going on for years already.

By the laws of succession, a grandson comes before a daughter.  So Young Griff (assuming he really is Aegon, or at least that everyone can be convinced that he is) is ahead of Daenerys in line.  But Viserys is ahead of both of them, and he seems to be the least qualified to be king.  His presence throws a monkey wrench into illyrio's plan.

I think the marriage of Daenerys to Drogo was just a scheme to get her and Viserys out of the picture.  Illyrio expected that one or both of them would either die on the Dothraki sea, or stay there for some long period of time while the YG plan was unfolding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

I still think the Dothraki are more brutal.

Maybe, either way it's a dead village 

3 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

The crow cages were after months of deliberately brutal raids that Tywin intended to be really harsh and over the top.

See, Westerosi be wild'n. Besides, those guys were Karstark men, not Tywins.

3 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

The crucial point for the Smallfolk is that the violence is inflicted by foreigners who the Targaryens have brought over.

I don't think the fact that theyre foreigners really matters. Like the people and nobility hated the brave companions true but not for any xenophobic reason or anything. Like a lot of insults were thrown but they didn't have anything to do with being foreign.

4 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

The Dothraki have a reputation for being barbarians and savages. As soon as they land they will immediately justify this reputation for savagery by killing, raiding, looting etc. in front of a lot of witnesses

Why? Drogo can control his men, we see the Dothraki under Dany acting like a liberating army, practically unsullied like. 

The savagery and barbarianism (which is how Essosi think of the sunset kingdoms) are just stereotypes. (Not saying they're not savages and barbarians, they are. But so is Tywin and co)

4 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

By comparison the evidence available to the public for the incest is weak.

The public doesn't have much of a say. Besides my point was some lord is bound to piss off another lord in the distant future. Robb and Walder, Lannister infighting, Greyjoy infighting, etc. There's always an uglier fish.

4 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

Well if the GC and Dothraki don't have unified command/command in contact with each other then they will be following different plans, attack different places and have a different strategy, they won't be as effective as they should be because the Dothraki, at least at the start will be using tactics they used in Essos while the GC uses more appropriate tactics.

To me, the GC and a Targaryen invasion is a non starter. They served Bittersteel and are damn surely not going to put a red dragon anywhere near daemons throne. 

(But I'll just pretend you said Dornish or whomever because at a minimum we know Viserys and Arianna are supposed to get married.)

Of course they'd have a unified command, which is I guess the whole problem. 

Quote

"Viserys says he could sweep the Seven Kingdoms with ten thousand Dothraki screamers."

Ser Jorah snorted. "Viserys could not sweep a stable with ten thousand brooms."

Literally almost anybody, like the last king of Aspator, would be better then Viserys. (poor Arianna, lucky girl)

4 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

They can, but I think it would be quite a slow process, the Dothraki seem very prideful, by the time they realise they have to change something they could have lost a lot of men already. When they were attacking Qohor for example they just kept on charging even as the casualties were mounting

That's true but that was like a thousand years ago against an army that seems specifically designed for fighting Dothraki. 

They are prideful, with their bells and such. But that concept kinda means that they understand taking a L and moving on is acceptable, even if you're virtually starting again from level one.

Besides, I'm not entirely convinced that a khallasar wouldn't wipe the floor with a Westerosi army.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Why? Drogo can control his men, we see the Dothraki under Dany acting like a liberating army, practically unsullied like. 

Yes, but in this scenario Drogo is alive. Drogo can only control his men up to a point, he gets them to leave some poor woman alone only because he thinks Daenerys wants her as a slave, and his men aren't happy about it. We see a few act that way under Daenerys but they won't be under her leadership in this scenario because Drogo is still alive.

4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

I don't think the fact that theyre foreigners really matters.

I'm not sure about that, people didn't like the Rogares just because they had foreign gods. The Dothraki don't just have foreign gods, they will be raiding and pillaging everywhere.

4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

(But I'll just pretend you said Dornish or whomever because at a minimum we know Viserys and Arianna are supposed to get married.

Well it depends on whether we are talking about a scenario where Viserys is alive or not. But the Dothraki should not go near the Dornish deserts.

4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

To me, the GC and a Targaryen invasion is a non starter. They served Bittersteel and are damn surely not going to put a red dragon anywhere near daemons throne

I agree it would never happen because I think the whole point was for Aegon and GC to come and 'save' the Kingdom after the Dothraki invade.

4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Besides, I'm not entirely convinced that a khallasar wouldn't wipe the floor with a Westerosi army.

I think they'd really struggle against knights and any terrain that isn't open fields.

4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Besides my point was some lord is bound to piss off another lord in the distant future.

That's true but I don't think it usually results in the kind of brutality the Dothraki are known for unless you're Tywin or the feuding gets really bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Besides, I'm not entirely convinced that a khallasar wouldn't wipe the floor with a Westerosi army.

The Mongols weren't able of wiping the floor against polish and hungarian armies, I very strongly doubt that Dothraki who haven't the Mongols' heavy cavalry, discipline and expertise in sieges and fighting heavy armies can do it against westerosi armies unless they are led by catastrophic leaders. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Their only hope is that the twincest gets Robert acting unwise, otherwise they're facing annhilation.

15 years is a lot of time, the rebels have consolidated their power in their kingdoms and have started to make alliances in the loyalist's kingdoms. Ofc the twincest can throw a wrench to that foundation, thanks twins and get the rebels to fight among themselves and weaken the coalition but even then the odds are not in their favour, with or without Dorne. There's also the fact that bar they got help from Braavos, the Baratheons would have naval superiority in the Narrow Sea. So they may even be unable to land. 

Viserys is their single biggest problem, the man is as unfit as he is unspiring. 

Edited by frenin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we take frenin's suggestion that an incest reveal causes Robert to do something rash, which results in Tywin rebelling, then at the very most you have ~50,000 from the Westerlands, ~40,000 from Drogo's Khalasar, ~25,000 from Dorne and if the GC join in another ~10,000. This is a best case scenario estimate that assumes all Dothrkai and GC land with no issues. Perhaps a few thousand from the Reach and Riverlands but I don't think they would be that keen to be honest, especially because an incest reveal means Renly's plan to marry Margaery to Robert is very likely. So ~135,000 max for the Targaryens. This assumes that they don't just attack the weaker and isolated Westerlands right away, which I find unlikely as I really don't think they would want to squander the opportunity to get revenge on Tywin. So bar Tywin the Targaryens have ~75,000 assuming close to optimum conditions. Another issue is coordinating the Dothraki. Tywin could hire sellswords but I don't know how long they'd take to sail, and the royal fleet would be an issue, as well as the Redwyne fleet if the Tyrells are with Robert.

For the Baratheon loyalists, we have ~40,000 from the North, ~30,000 for the Stormlands, ~70,000-75,000 for the Reach depending on how many Targaryen loyalists there are (I really don't think there would be that many), I will give a conservative estimate of ~30,000 for the Riverlands assuming there are some loyalists and feuding stops them from fielding everyone possible. So ~170,000 for the loyalists, assuming there are loyalists in the Reach and Riverlands (I don't think there'd be many). So even minus the Westerlands, Dorne and some Reach and Riverland royalists I still think the Baratheon loyalists would have clearly superior numbers, even if all the Targaryen overseas troops landed flawlessly and they somehow didn't attack Tywin but got his support.

The Vale is a wildcard but I really don't think they would support the Targaryens given that Aerys murdered the heir to the vale and all Vale loyalists were soundly defeated by the rebels. Littlefinger could convince Lysa to support the Targaryens but even that would just even the numbers out more, rather than assuring a Targaryen victory. I think the Vale would choose to stay neutral.

I think it's likely the Ironborn would rebel in this scenario so wouldn't add to either army, but I also think Balon would attack the most likely weaker and isolated Westerlands with better plunder rather than the Baratheon loyalist block.

EDIT:

As frenin pointed out the Vale would most likely side with Robert if he's still alive, so the Baratheon loyalists would have ~210,000 assuming they can get support of 40,000 from the vale. So it doesn't seem that numbers will be on the Targaryens' side even in good circumstances.

Edited by Craving Peaches
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

I think the Vale would choose to stay neutral.

That's not really realistic tho. Most of the Vale Lords were rebels once and deep ties with both Ned and Robert. The fact that Robert's also their King makes their support a given.

One thing is being forced to support a civil war between Robert's sons/brothers and Ned's and another is Robert and Ned going against the Targaryens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, frenin said:

That's not really realistic tho. Most of the Vale Lords were rebels once and deep ties with both Ned and Robert. The fact that Robert's also their King makes their support a given.

I forgot about that, I was thinking about after Robert died and Lysa was keeping them stubbornly neutral on Littlefinger's orders. Silly me. :(

So the advantage in numbers would just be weighted even further against the Targaryens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the main plot of Illyrio and Varys was for Daenerys to use the Dorthraki to qoncuer, gain power and influence, have children and maybe if she managed to hatch the Dragon eggs to give Dragons to her and fAegon. Then they would eitrher intermarry or marry her children and herself with fAegon and the Martells and other Targaryen loyalists and invade Westeros with a full Targaryen army and court and the support of Pentos.

Edited by Dreadscythe95
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lady Misery said:

But people absolutely hate the Ironborn. Same goes for Dorne and the Reach's relationship. 

Thats true, but most people in westeros generally hate their neighbors. Like Crangormen and Twinsmen, or Bracken and Blackwood. 

 

2 hours ago, Vaegon the dragonless said:

Him curious on why you think that ? Because to me it is clear that the dothraki are completely subpar and would not hold for a hour against a Westerosi army.

Their bows can shoot further then their western counterparts. If the combatants were like pro general Drogo vs brother Stafford then Id surely put my money on the Dothraki
 

 

2 hours ago, Terrorthatflapsinthenight9 said:

The Mongols weren't able of wiping the floor against polish and hungarian armies, I very strongly doubt that Dothraki who haven't the Mongols' heavy cavalry, discipline and expertise in sieges and fighting heavy armies can do it against westerosi armies unless they are led by catastrophic leaders. 

Of course they were. What? Mohi was the definition of a wiped floor. Bela IV and frankly all of Central Europe (consequently soon to be Western Europe) only got saved when Batu went back home to press his claim for khan. 
 

3 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

Yes, but in this scenario Drogo is alive. Drogo can only control his men up to a point, he gets them to leave some poor woman alone only because he thinks Daenerys wants her as a slave, and his men aren't happy about it.

No they were not, but they obeyed.

3 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

I'm not sure about that, people didn't like the Rogares just because they had foreign gods. The Dothraki don't just have foreign gods, they will be raiding and pillaging everywhere.

That Dothraki in the Brave Companions, iirc the one that chopped off Jaimes hand, isnt singled out. 
Also define everywhere? Because theyd only be attacking the ones that dont acknowledge Targaryen hegemony  

3 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

Well it depends on whether we are talking about a scenario where Viserys is alive or not. But the Dothraki should not go near the Dornish deserts.

Why? Id think the Dothraki could gallop through the deserts relatively quickly

3 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

I think they'd really struggle against knights and any terrain that isn't open fields.

Whispering Wood, maybe theyd be at a disadvantage, trees and such. BW theyd kill it, on either side. Battle at the wall theyd be very beneficial for either side too. I dont see the screamers failing at Oxcross or outside Winterfell either for example.
Out of all warfare in asoiaf when would the Dothraki be at disadvantage?

3 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

That's true but I don't think it usually results in the kind of brutality the Dothraki are known for unless you're Tywin or the feuding gets really bad.

Westerosi are a savage lot. Up north they flay down south they burn, Seven Kingdoms in despair, the village around Darry for example isnt even a village, just corpses and gatehouse Ami.
The dothraki arent known for that, nor do they crucify children like the Ghiscari. The Dothraki are bad, but so is everyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Up north they flay down south they burn, Seven Kingdoms in despair, the village around Darry for example isnt even a village, just corpses and gatehouse Ami.

But with both of these examples they are noted to be especially brutal, so above normal levels of brutality. The Dothraki are that brutal by default.

6 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

The Dothraki are bad, but so is everyone else.

I am going to have to disagree there, I think the Dothraki are extra brutal.

7 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Why? Id think the Dothraki could gallop through the deserts relatively quickly

Because there is a complete lack of fodder and water for their horses. We see how Daaenrys' khalasar fares in the Red Waste.

8 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Battle at the wall theyd be very beneficial for either side too.

I disagree because they have no experience with Westerosi conditions, they haven't ridden through snow before, they would find it very cold etc.

9 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Out of all warfare in asoiaf when would the Dothraki be at disadvantage?

When they are against opponents in plate armour or not on open, level ground.

11 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

No they were not, but they obeyed.

How long would it last though before they got really fed up and tried to challenge Drogo's leadership? If he gives in to Daenerys' will too many times he would look weak.

13 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Also define everywhere? Because theyd only be attacking the ones that dont acknowledge Targaryen hegemony

This assumes a level of control over the Dothraki which Viserys or Daenerys won't have in this scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

Their bows can shoot further then their western counterparts. If the combatants were like pro general Drogo vs brother Stafford then Id surely put my money on the Dothraki

It does not seem so to me, since the Westerosi use long bows that are only beaten by goldenheart tree bows and dragonbone bows. Jon Connington comments upon that when talking about the archers of the GC, saying that essosi bows are inferior to the westerosi longbow. So the Dothraki dont have the archery advantage. To add upon that historically mounted archer are alot less effective then their foot counter part, so in archery the westerosi have a serious advantage. In fact they have a serious advantage in all aspects exept ligth cavalery wich is not that effective outside scouting, raiding and pursuit.

Sure against someone like Stafford the dothraki could win, but against Stannis ? Robert ? Eddard ? Randyll ? Or any of the many good generals that Westeros as to offer I dont think so.

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

Out of all warfare in asoiaf when would the Dothraki be at disadvantage?

The dothraki would have lost at almost every single battle we see in Westeros, in fact him not sure the Dothraki have won a battle against anyone other then themselfs since the bleeding years.

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...