Who Will Win the Battle for Winterfell?

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

I guess I want to know what y’all think. I kind of have no idea, but I’ll still say what I think. 

I think the Freys fall into the lake, and the Manderlys change sides around this point. Freys get slaughtered. However, this still leaves Winterfell in Roose’s hands. This is the point where I am really just guessing. 

Honestly, it is not going to go all good (for people wjo hate the Boltons like me) but I still think we might see Northern lords other than Manderly betraying Roose at this point. How that plays out though, I have no clue. I think its possible Roose dies leaving Ramsay in charge and then Ramsay does something horrific. I also don’t think Stannis will die. My best guess is Stannis will take Winterfell, but Ramsay and the chief strength of House Bolton are gone (somehow) by the time he takes it. At this point most of the North (othrt than House Bolton) is semi-united under Stannis. However, Ramsay is alive, and we also have the question of what the Northenr lords do if Davos shows up with Rickon. 

[kissdbyfire]

The Freys are marching full speed ahead w/ the Manderlys behind them, which will make for a nice slaughter of Freys. Then convos between Stannis & Manderly commander, Theon, stuff relayed by Bran & Bloodraven, Frey uniforms galore, yadda yadda yadda. And I think many within Winterfell will do what they’ve wanted to do all along, which is to give Roose the middle finger.

[James Steller]

Ramsay’s time is up. He’s not some genius strategist, nor is he even a deadly warrior. He is a psychopath who just got really lucky. If it wasn’t for Theon, he’d have rotted in Winterfell’s dungeons. I’ll grant him some low cunning, but he benefitted from treachery to get the advantage. Nothing more. 
He has served his purpose, and now there’s a new psychopath to present an even greater threat. If GRRM has any sense, he won’t prolong Ramsay’s demise. 

Edited November 9, 2023 by James Steller

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

2 hours ago, James Steller said:

Ramsay’s time is up. He’s not some genius strategist, nor is he even a deadly warrior. He is a psychopath who just got really lucky. If it wasn’t for Theon, he’d have rotted in Winterfell’s dungeons. I’ll grant him some low cunning, but he benefitted from treachery to get the advantage. Nothing more. 
He has served his purpose, and now there’s a new psychopath to present an even greater threat. If GRRM has any sense, he won’t prolong Ramsay’s demise. 

I mean, honestly, I'd prefer this. The Pink Letter is my reason for believing that Ramsay is going to survive into TWoW. But honestly,I'd be very happy if he died in the opening 50 pages, lol. Roose is a more interesting villain than Ramsay anyways. 

[Hugorfonics]

7 minutes ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

Roose is a more interesting villain than Ramsay anyways. 

Why? He just sits around staring, he's like one of those Septas with their tongues cut off, Ramsay is infinitely more exciting. Granted Ramsay is one lucky son of a Roose but everything he's done is why his father is where he is today, if Ramsays lucky then what's Roose? Of course Roose attributes this to Theon because it's easier to make fun of Reek then it is to say thank you to your child, which is kind of funny but it still doesn't compete with the actual terror of his son.

Unless Stannis ditches his red hawk for a blue one, which is certainly possible however theres been no hint that that could happen, he will burn the Weirwood if he wins the battle. Further in twow he hints at his death or possibly a misdirect where he fakes and with these two insights, mainly the sacrilege he'd definitely commit on the protagonists shrubbery, Stannis will not conquer Winterfell.

[Angel Eyes]

Ramsay and his 20 good men.

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

11 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Why? He just sits around staring, he's like one of those Septas with their tongues cut off, Ramsay is infinitely more exciting. Granted Ramsay is one lucky son of a Roose but everything he's done is why his father is where he is today, if Ramsays lucky then what's Roose? Of course Roose attributes this to Theon because it's easier to make fun of Reek then it is to say thank you to your child, which is kind of funny but it still doesn't compete with the actual terror of his son.

Unless Stannis ditches his red hawk for a blue one, which is certainly possible however theres been no hint that that could happen, he will burn the Weirwood if he wins the battle. Further in twow he hints at his death or possibly a misdirect where he fakes and with these two insights, mainly the sacrilege he'd definitely commit on the protagonists shrubbery, Stannis will not conquer Winterfell.

Hmmm. We have a different idea of exciting. I honestly don't like the extremely violent/sadistic villains in these books (or any books). I don't find Ramsay all that exciting at all. As to what makes Roose more compelling. Well he actually plans things, while as Ramsay got lucky. You said without Ramsay, Roose would have nothing, but Roose orchestrated the Red Wedding with Walder Frey, and had already been carefully bleeding Stark loyalists through most of the books.

Roose is also playing both sides. He is trying to seem like a good Northman, even while betraying the actual good Northmen. If Ramsay was in charge from the beginning, no one, absolutely no one, would have followed the Boltons. Roose legitimizes Ramsay and protects him from the consequences of his actions. The entire North would have been united against Ramsay and looking to murder him if not for him being Roose's son. The main base for Roose's non-Dreadfort strength is the Ryswells and the Dustins, who would IMMEDIETELY abandon a Ramsay led House Bolton. Ramsay is literally going to cause the complete annihilation of House Bolton by the end of these books. 

What makes Roose a more compelling villain? I could read a book with Roose as the villain and believe he could win. A book with Ramsay as the main villain would require tons of random luck in order for the character to not get betrayed or die immediately. Ramsay can only exist with Roose protecting him. Honestly, I am surprised that people don't hire assassins more often in these books in general, but specifically, yes, I think Ramsay would get assassinated, like quickly. No one wants Ramsay as their leader. No one. And Roose even makes it clear that all of Ramsay's loyal followers, are in fact Roose's loyals followers that Roose has given him. To be blunt, Ramsay is an idiot as well as a sadist. He reminds me of Joffrey in that way, only even Joffrey understood he needed to act the gallant prince sometimes (something Ramsay clearly doesn't). 

Honestly, though, I think it is clear. The main thing I like more about Roose is that he is not Ramsay. I think Ramsay served his purpose in the story (and actually there was too much of him if anything), and I want him dead. I've often felt that modern Hollywood keeps villains alive too long in tv shows. Villains can be hated, but they also must die, or it can be too much. Tywin, for example, dies at a perfect time. Perfectly executed by GRRM.I had reached perfect boiling point of my hate of Tywin, and bam, GRRM killed him. Perfecto! Roose can continue to exist in the story without me feeling frustrated, Ramsay honestly cannot make it much longer before it is too much Ramsay. I want him to die. I don't want to see him mutilate or harm any more people. I already hate him the maximum amount I can hate him. There is nothing he can serve in a storyline that would compel me from this point forward. 

[TheLastWolf]

King Hot Pie

[Alester Florent]

5 hours ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

Honestly, I am surprised that people don't hire assassins more often in these books in general, but specifically, yes, I think Ramsay would get assassinated, like quickly.

I think this is in part because the kind of disinterested freelance contract killer beloved of fantasy is pretty much just that, a fantasy invention. Generally, IRL, if you want someone killed, your options are to do it yourself (or via your own people), or publish some kind of indictment against them and hope that someone will kill them in hope of a reward. While a lot of rulers (and noblemen, etc.) throughout history have been assassinated, the general shape of them is either using the apparatus of the state (or paramilitary) to murder them in a way which might as well be public, with the best you can hope for by way of concealment being to treat it as a false flag operation, or internal "palace coups" by dissatisfied military staff or equivalent. When lone assassins commit such killings they tend to be individuals (or members of terrorist groups) who do so for ideological reasons (which may or may not align with those of a rival state who applauds the assassination) - and they are almost always caught, making it somewhat unattractive as a line of work.

Somewhere like Westeros, then, if you want a rival killed, and if it's someone like a king where you have to expect his guards to be effective at protecting him both from lone nutters and from direct assaults by your own guys, your options are to try to subvert a trusted figure already within their organisation, or send someone to infiltrate their organisation.  Successful infiltrators are a rare breed, though: they have to be clever enough not to get caught before they do the deed, but stupid enough to think they have a reasonable chance to get away with it. And given the extent to which Westeros operates on personal relationships, such an infilitration is going to take time, and there's the risk not only that your assassin gets caught, but that they get comfortable, that they lose heart, switch sides, etc.

GRRM is obviously trying to walk a tightrope between a moderately historically grounded setting and a fantasy one with enormous ice walls and dragons. The House of Black and White seems to be his concession to the fantasy "assassins' guild", which seems to be the only organisation we know of supplying independent assasssins and... honestly I don't know how they're supposed to work? It's implied in FaB and TWoIaF that they are cripplingly expensive to hire, but also they seem to stay in business and kill off random small fry in Braavos, so maybe they're only expensive for foreigners? And even then, the one successful contracted killing we know the Faceless Men have pulled off in Westeros (Balon) still fits the "palace coup" model, even if the actual assassin was an outsider. Euron could probably just as easily have done it himself or had his guys do it, but presumably wanted to maintain the facade of legitimacy.

The other thing, of course, is that unless you're writing about the assassins themselves, having major characters bumped off by faceless assassins is not very narratively satisfying. We have seen a number of assassinations but other than Balon, they have been pretty up close and personal and with a named character more or less in the room pulling the trigger. If instead of Walder and Roose, it was Joe and Bill Schmoe who killed Robb at a feast, and then two chapters later we found out that Tywin hired them, that's not much of a payoff.

There's another exception: the dude with a knife who attacked Bran. Perhaps the closest we get to the classic "rando with a knife" assassination attempt. And while it's a dramatic scene, I would argue that it is indeed not particularly narratively satisfying. (It's also botched, which may be another illustration of why this stuff isn't tried more often). It feels more like an authorial contrivance to start the chain of events that leads to Tyrion's arrest and LF's betraying Ned in motion more than anything else.

[Hugorfonics]

8 hours ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

Hmmm. We have a different idea of exciting. I honestly don't like the extremely violent/sadistic villains in these books (or any books).

It makes an indepth baddie imo. Hes actually terrifying, like Dracula.
Plus Ramsay's style is like a perverted take on Stark magic which I think is kind of cool, in an extremely violent and sadistic way lol. Tony Montana said we've never seen a bad guy like him, but lets be real, Ramsay is a different breed

8 hours ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

As to what makes Roose more compelling. Well he actually plans things, while as Ramsay got lucky. You said without Ramsay, Roose would have nothing, but Roose orchestrated the Red Wedding with Walder Frey, and had already been carefully bleeding Stark loyalists through most of the books.

I dont think he did, I think he was just inept. Walder and Tywin orchestrated the RW while Ramsay cleared the North, all Roose has done is to sometimes pretend to take credit for it.
That Roose was gungho on the RW is clearly not the case as he would have remained loyal if Jaime the one handed knight refused to dance to his tune.

8 hours ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

Roose legitimizes Ramsay and protects him from the consequences of his actions.

Tommen legitimized Ramsay and Roose went along with it to protect himself

8 hours ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

Ramsay is literally going to cause the complete annihilation of House Bolton by the end of these books. 

Probably but like Icarus, or Mace Tyrell. 

8 hours ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

What makes Roose a more compelling villain? I could read a book with Roose as the villain and believe he could win. A book with Ramsay as the main villain would require tons of random luck in order for the character to not get betrayed or die immediately. Ramsay can only exist with Roose protecting him. Honestly, I am surprised that people don't hire assassins more often in these books in general, but specifically, yes, I think Ramsay would get assassinated, like quickly. No one wants Ramsay as their leader. No one. And Roose even makes it clear that all of Ramsay's loyal followers, are in fact Roose's loyals followers that Roose has given him. To be blunt, Ramsay is an idiot as well as a sadist. He reminds me of Joffrey in that way, only even Joffrey understood he needed to act the gallant prince sometimes (something Ramsay clearly doesn't). 

I disagree with a bunch of this, nobody wants either of these fuckers ruling over them. Roose thinks his silent rule will cow his vassals into submission while Ramsay, kinda like Joff, realizes he must put on a face to terrorize his subjects into submission. Ramsay is shrewd, he has shown that time and time again.

8 hours ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

Honestly, though, I think it is clear. The main thing I like more about Roose is that he is not Ramsay. I think Ramsay served his purpose in the story (and actually there was too much of him if anything), and I want him dead. I've often felt that modern Hollywood keeps villains alive too long in tv shows. Villains can be hated, but they also must die, or it can be too much. Tywin, for example, dies at a perfect time. Perfectly executed by GRRM.I had reached perfect boiling point of my hate of Tywin, and bam, GRRM killed him. Perfecto! Roose can continue to exist in the story without me feeling frustrated, Ramsay honestly cannot make it much longer before it is too much Ramsay. I want him to die. I don't want to see him mutilate or harm any more people. I already hate him the maximum amount I can hate him. There is nothing he can serve in a storyline that would compel me from this point forward. 

Yea I see that all the time, I wish I could say I dont understand peoples anger and hate over a fictional character but after Theon conquered Bran's castle I too was angry and wished harm onto Theon, enter stage left Ramsay. 
So it's kind of funny that it's' repeating, but on a grander scale. So, question?
How much do you hate him? For example, I "hate" characters like say Tywin and Eddard, but I dont hate their existence, far from it I think asoiaf would suffer tremendously if they were absent in their fullness, now compared to like Star Wars' JarJar or Breaking Bad's Skylar, I actually do hate and dread the screentime they posses (the better example is Darkstar but I feel thats a bit unfair because of little screentime I dont know him like I know Skylar Binks) , so im curious do you hate Ramsay like the character or the existence? 

[James Steller]

38 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

How much do you hate him? For example, I "hate" characters like say Tywin and Eddard, but I dont hate their existence, far from it I think asoiaf would suffer tremendously if they were absent in their fullness, now compared to like Star Wars' JarJar or Breaking Bad's Skylar, I actually do hate and dread the screentime they posses (the better example is Darkstar but I feel thats a bit unfair because of little screentime I dont know him like I know Skylar Binks) , so im curious do you hate Ramsay like the character or the existence? 

The fact that you’re one of those Skylar haters says all I need to know.

[Hugorfonics]

18 minutes ago, James Steller said:

The fact that you’re one of those Skylar haters says all I need to know.

Lol. She doesnt really add to the story, is neither a protagonist nor an antagonist. Just wasted screen time really, a few times she seems like her story is getting wild but then it just fizzles out while shes back at square one. I remember I used to defend her until that swimming pool scene, and I remember thinking Is this the type of television im intrested in?
Its a shame really, they shoulda been like Succession or Black Sails and ended after 4 seasons instead of sinking into what I describe as bad television. 

Also now that im further clarifying stuff, I dont really hate Jar Jar lol

[Alester Florent]

30 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Also now that im further clarifying stuff, I dont really hate Jar Jar lol

You hate Eddard Stark, but not Jar Jar?

[James Steller]

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

I remember I used to defend her until that swimming pool scene, and I remember thinking Is this the type of television im intrested in?
 

You mean the scene where Skylar was having a breakdown while trying to act like things were normal after her husband had raped her?

and yes, that’s what happened. Walt absolutely was raping her, they hint at it when we see him in bed with her before the pool scene. That look of terror she has while he’s monologuing at her between kisses… it’s disgusting. 

I might be the only person who loathed and detested Walter White from season 2 onward, but I don’t care. He was the sort of monster that deserved a truly heinous comeuppance. Skylar was only detestable to me when she started supporting Walt against Hank and Marie. 

[Hugorfonics]

1 hour ago, James Steller said:

You mean the scene where Skylar was having a breakdown while trying to act like things were normal after her husband had raped her?

and yes, that’s what happened. Walt absolutely was raping her, they hint at it when we see him in bed with her before the pool scene. That look of terror she has while he’s monologuing at her between kisses… it’s disgusting. 

I might be the only person who loathed and detested Walter White from season 2 onward, but I don’t care. He was the sort of monster that deserved a truly heinous comeuppance. Skylar was only detestable to me when she started supporting Walt against Hank and Marie. 

Oh damn, that was that scene? Tbh I havent seen that show in ages and maybe should give it a rewatch. I think its more that I started to dislike the show as it got less sciencey then actually hate the character. I was just using her and Binks as like a catch all characters, but I guess a better example would be like that lady from Mad Men who get electroshocked, not that I hated what she said or did, I just dont get how it reflected the story and thought it detracted from the things around it. Which I certainly dont think about Eddard. (but you know truthfully maybe a little Jar Jar lol)

 

2 hours ago, Alester Florent said:

You hate Eddard Stark, but not Jar Jar?

Lol, pretty cool comparisons! Both thoroughly fucked the realm through their naivety, gullibility and stupidity. Binks giving Palpatine absolute power is what Ned tried to do with Stannis, although their plans went haywire for different reasons. 
Gungan makes me smile though, I was raised with the fella, I dont think I've ever smiled at Ned (maybe with Arya), as JarJar would say "How rude!" Hes just like an asshole to everyone he talks to and is super judgmental like he wasnt a rebel not 20 years ago. His handling of Theon and stance on treating deserters like deathrow because of the barbaric law he implements would be sickening enough if he didnt brainwash his sons into believing that. (Luckly his kids are of the brighter nobler stock, although perhaps in this regard not Arya? Who wasnt actually present at all these beheadings which further questions why Bran can't look away?) But lastly leaving his children as bait in the lion den is Doran level of fathering and the girls should be thankful, although not to their father, for escaping Quentyns horrid fate. 

[Mithras]

There won't be a battle for Winterfell. There is an upcoming battle at the crofter's village and several months later I expect Jon vs Ramsay battle near the Long Lake which Ramsay will lose. At this point, the Boltons will be all but spent and Winterfell will be taken rather easily.

[sifth]

I certainly hope this is it for the Boltons. They’re both villains who have out stayed their welcome.

[Craving Peaches]

Boltons lose but Ramsay escapes to fight Jon later. Stannis still runs out of food though because food in Winterfell is also running out and with weather there is no way to just ship food in.

[Angel Eyes]

23 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

 

 

Lol, pretty cool comparisons! Both thoroughly fucked the realm through their naivety, gullibility and stupidity. Binks giving Palpatine absolute power is what Ned tried to do with Stannis, although their plans went haywire for different reasons. 
Gungan makes me smile though, I was raised with the fella, I dont think I've ever smiled at Ned (maybe with Arya), as JarJar would say "How rude!" Hes just like an asshole to everyone he talks to and is super judgmental like he wasnt a rebel not 20 years ago. His handling of Theon and stance on treating deserters like deathrow because of the barbaric law he implements would be sickening enough if he didnt brainwash his sons into believing that. (Luckly his kids are of the brighter nobler stock, although perhaps in this regard not Arya? Who wasnt actually present at all these beheadings which further questions why Bran can't look away?) But lastly leaving his children as bait in the lion den is Doran level of fathering and the girls should be thankful, although not to their father, for escaping Quentyns horrid fate. 

I'd say Doran was worse; Ned didn't know what Sansa was getting into with Joffrey, while Doran knew what Viserys was like and betrothed Arianne anyway.

[KingStoneheart]

On 11/9/2023 at 1:07 PM, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

My best guess is Stannis will take Winterfell, but Ramsay and the chief strength of House Bolton are gone (somehow) by the time he takes it. At this point most of the North (othrt than House Bolton) is semi-united under Stannis. However, Ramsay is alive, and we also have the question of what the Northenr lords do if Davos shows up with Rickon. 

I’m pretty much in full agreement tbh. I reckon Roose will ultimately die during the battle / taking of Winterfell. Who’s hand that’s at, I don’t know

I do think Ramsay will escape and do some vile things afterwards with whatever remaining Bolton loyalists but ultimately the Northern lords will be significantly more on side with Stannis (especially as he has “Arya”) than they ever were with the Boltons.

Is it possible that some events could unfold in which Ramsay and Rickon come face-to-face? With Rickon dying, it opens the possibility up to allow a female successor to the Winterfell seat