Lord Protector Eddard

[Hugorfonics]

"Strike! Now, while the castle sleeps." Renly looked back at Ser Boros again and dropped his voice to an urgent whisper. "We must get Joffrey away from his mother and take him in hand. Protector or no, the man who holds the king holds the kingdom. We should seize Myrcella and Tommen as well. Once we have her children, Cersei will not dare oppose us. The council will confirm you as Lord Protector and make Joffrey your ward."

 

To me, the parallels here reflects off of one of England's most infamous tyrants, Richard iii, also a bit of tyrant Cromwell because of the lord protector bit. Anyway, something along those lines is why Eddard turned the plan down, deceitful, dishonorable, disproportionately dislikable. He said as much to Petyr when pitched pretty much the same play. Political or not, it would have been morally bankrupt, to the outer world and to thy inner self,  but the real question is would it have been pragmatic?

“Cersei will not dare oppose us.” Uh, maybe? But Tywin will dare. Stannis dare, Balon dare and Euron dare. Oberyn, JonC, Mance, Dany, dare. The world is dark and full of straphangers. Obviously Ned didn't make every decision correctly, but I believe here he certainly did as in victory or defeat it would have destroyed his honor, but I also see a very slim chance of victory as he would have made himself public enemy number one of Westeros.

[Floki of the Ironborn]

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

"Strike! Now, while the castle sleeps." Renly looked back at Ser Boros again and dropped his voice to an urgent whisper. "We must get Joffrey away from his mother and take him in hand. Protector or no, the man who holds the king holds the kingdom. We should seize Myrcella and Tommen as well. Once we have her children, Cersei will not dare oppose us. The council will confirm you as Lord Protector and make Joffrey your ward."

 

To me, the parallels here reflects off of one of England's most infamous tyrants, Richard iii, also a bit of tyrant Cromwell because of the lord protector bit. Anyway, something along those lines is why Eddard turned the plan down, deceitful, dishonorable, disproportionately dislikable. He said as much to Petyr when pitched pretty much the same play. Political or not, it would have been morally bankrupt, to the outer world and to thy inner self,  but the real question is would it have been pragmatic?

“Cersei will not dare oppose us.” Uh, maybe? But Tywin will dare. Stannis dare, Balon dare and Euron dare. Oberyn, JonC, Mance, Dany, dare. The world is dark and full of straphangers. Obviously Ned didn't make every decision correctly, but I believe here he certainly did as in victory or defeat it would have destroyed his honor, but I also see a very slim chance of victory as he would have made himself public enemy number one of Westeros.

Agreed. Renly's plan was dumb. It would have antagonised everyone and painted Ned as a usurper. Ned's original plan might have worked if Sansa didn't betray him.

[frenin]

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

Anyway, something along those lines is why Eddard turned the plan down, deceitful, dishonorable, disproportionately dislikable.

He regretted it like two lines afterwards.

 

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

but the real question is would it have been pragmatic?

Yes.

 

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

But Tywin will dare.

The issue with the plan is quite literally buy time to establish their power in the capital and then project in on the continent.

 

Quote

Once we have her children, Cersei will not dare oppose us. The council will confirm you as Lord Protector and make Joffrey your ward."

Once Eddard is acknowledged as Lord Protector and Regent, he will be free to project the power of the Crown onto Tywin, Stannis and Euron, who is a nonfactor in this equation.

The problem with Ned, and Renly to an extent, is that they had plenty of allies on the Realm at large but they were quite isolated in King's Landing, if they can buy time to  call on those allies, it's pretty much gg for the Lannisters.

 

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

Balon dare

No, he wouldn't.

 

Quote

"No man has ever died from bending his knee," her father had once told her. "He who kneels may rise again, blade in hand. He who will not kneel stays dead, stiff legs and all." Balon Greyjoy had proved the truth of his own words when his first rebellion failed; the kraken bent the knee to stag and direwolf, only to rise again when Robert Baratheon and Eddard Stark were dead.

He would sit quiet on his island till both Ned and Robert were dead.

 

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

Oberyn, JonC, Mance, Dany, dare.

Out all of those, the only one who poses an actual danger is Dany and she's half a world away.

Neither Oberyn, nor JonCon nor Mance pose any threat at all till the power of the rebels, and the kingdom at large, collapses in its entirety.

 

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

, but I believe here he certainly did as in victory or defeat it would have destroyed his honor

Why?

 

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

but I also see a very slim chance of victory as he would have made himself public enemy number one of Westeros.

No, he wouldn't have. Why would he would he?

Ned quite literally planned on seizing the children with the Goldcloaks anyway and he knew he'd confront the Lannisters, and he was sure of his victory. His only objection to Renly's plan was that Robert was still not dead.

 

32 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

It would have antagonised everyone

Why?

 

32 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

and painted Ned as a usurper.

What?

It'd be Ned enforcing the terms of Robert's will, how in the world does it make him a usurper?

[Ser Arthurs Dawn]

10 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Agreed. Renly's plan was dumb. It would have antagonised everyone and painted Ned as a usurper. Ned's original plan might have worked if Sansa didn't betray him.

Renly's plan was dumb, but Ned's wasn't? I personally believe Renly's plans had a better chance of working than Ned's.

First of all, you're blaming Sansa for things that were out of her control. Secondly, (and this is more of a technicality) I would use the word 'betrayal' very very loosely here, since she lacked both knowledge and the proper motive for it to really come down to that.

• She wanted to stay in KL so she could continue to enjoy court life, and so she could marry Joffrey
• Her father didn't give her what she wanted, so she naively sought out Cersei for help
• Sansa wasn't politically or maliciously choosing the Lannisters over the Starks, she was choosing her dream of court life over returning to Winterfell
• She had absolutely no clue what was brewing between Ned and Cersei

Did her actions have consequences? Yes, absolutely. But her actions aren't the reason that Ned was caught. She was being an 11 year old. Sansa's actions prevented her and Arya from leaving by ship, but Littlefinger and Cersei were already working out Ned's demise as well. Ned's plans had zero chances of working with or without Sansa's involvement because he trusted the wrong person, and he underestimated Cersei.

[Alester Florent]

Ned's plan was terrible. Or, rather, Ned's plan was barely a plan. He expected everyone to follow the terms of Robert's will, except possibly Cersei. Ignoring of course that he then himself intended to overturn Robert's will to give the throne to Stannis - sure, he's added a bit of sophistry but if Bob had had any idea that Stannis was the heir he wouldn't have put in that "until they come of age" clause. He forced a public confrontation with a prepared Cersei rather than using his main advantage, surprise, to actually secure his position. He thereby allows Cersei to take control of the throne room, and Joffrey the throne, without even the ghost of a struggle, himself rocking up late in the morning to the appearance of an established king rather than calling the court himself.

Perception counts for a lot: Ned sitting on the Throne reading Robert's will to an attendant court sends a very different message to a Ned standing at the foot of the Throne looking up at Cersei and Joffrey as they demand his fealty, even if legally he's in the right in both cases.

Ned's plan, such as it is, relies on everyone else playing by the rules even when he already knows that they're not playing by the rules. It is what we might call "Lawful Stupid".

Renly didn't know about the infidelity so what he was offering was simply what he thought Ned wanted. His support was essentially unconditional. If Ned had taken Renly's help, he could have then enacted his own plan to disinherit Joff anyway. There was nothing dishonourable about the plan itself. Indeed, it's similar enough to the plan Barristan, the man whose honour even Ned respects, actually did enact when he came to carry out his own coup in Meereen.

I love Ned, but looking back at those chapters, watching him effectively sign his own death warrant while thinking he's being all shrewd and playing the game, it's hard not to be annoyed, or wanting to grab the guy by the lapels and give him a shake.

Edited December 6, 2023 by Alester Florent

[Craving Peaches]

4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Anyway, something along those lines is why Eddard turned the plan down, deceitful, dishonorable, disproportionately dislikable.

He turns it down because he doesn't want to 'drag frightened children from their beds' (though he's perfectly fine with loads of children dying in the succession war he's causing, or Stannis killing them), and as frenin said he regrets it soon after.

Quote

… if Cersei elected to fight rather than flee, he might well have need of Renly's hundred swords, and more besides.

Ned also has zero issues with himself being deceitful at that point in the story, because what he did with the Will was already deceitful.

4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

But Tywin will dare.

He can dare all he wants but everyone else in the Realm would immediately jump on the opportunity to cut him down to size in this scenario.

4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Balon dare

Doubt it because Balon, if you look at him, is actually a coward. He waits until both Ned and Robert are dead and there are multiple different factions with armies in the field fighting each other before chasing the weakest target he can to attack.

4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Oberyn,

Oberyn wants revenge on Twyin and Ned/Renly's plan in this scenario allows him to do that, so why he would have beef with Ned deposing Cersei, which weakens Tywin?

4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Mance

Mance invading has nothing to do with whether Ned sides with Renly or not. Ditto Dany. Jon Con depends, he might wait in such a scenario because they were looking to exploit infighting which is why Varys had to off Kevan. Ned as LP with Renly's backing is going to have more support and so be a stabilising figure.

2 hours ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

It would have antagonised everyone and painted Ned as a usurper.

How exactly? The plan does not make Ned king, it gives Ned leverage to execute Robert's will, as witnessed by Ser Barristan. Ned is not usurping anyone but following the law. The only people it would antagonise are the Lannisters and no one outside of their own vassals likes them.

Edited December 6, 2023 by Craving Peaches

[Northern Sword]

23 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

"Strike! Now, while the castle sleeps." Renly looked back at Ser Boros again and dropped his voice to an urgent whisper. "We must get Joffrey away from his mother and take him in hand. Protector or no, the man who holds the king holds the kingdom. We should seize Myrcella and Tommen as well. Once we have her children, Cersei will not dare oppose us. The council will confirm you as Lord Protector and make Joffrey your ward."

 

To me, the parallels here reflects off of one of England's most infamous tyrants, Richard iii, also a bit of tyrant Cromwell because of the lord protector bit. Anyway, something along those lines is why Eddard turned the plan down, deceitful, dishonorable, disproportionately dislikable. He said as much to Petyr when pitched pretty much the same play. Political or not, it would have been morally bankrupt, to the outer world and to thy inner self,  but the real question is would it have been pragmatic?

“Cersei will not dare oppose us.” Uh, maybe? But Tywin will dare. Stannis dare, Balon dare and Euron dare. Oberyn, JonC, Mance, Dany, dare. The world is dark and full of straphangers. Obviously Ned didn't make every decision correctly, but I believe here he certainly did as in victory or defeat it would have destroyed his honor, but I also see a very slim chance of victory as he would have made himself public enemy number one of Westeros.

Ned was not morally equipped to deal with this situation. His honor, tied time down, when no one around him was playing with the same rule book.

First, Ol' Bobby B wasn't dead yet. Ned decided to wait, big mistake.

Second, Ned telegraphed what he was going to do, to his enemy(Cersei). This is the basics of What Not To Do 101

Third, Ned turned down Renly's support. I am still shaking my head at this. 

Strike 3 - you're dead. 

If he prioritized the Realms well being over his honor. He would have acted on 1 and 3, while keeping Cersei in the dark. He would have gained control and surrounded himself with swords with the King in his possession. Once he was Hand, Regent, Lord Protector, or what ever combination he could act in the most honorable way. Love good ol' dead Ned, but he did it to himself. He and his whole family paid for it. 

He should have followed the Tully words... Family, Duty, Honor. In that order.

Edited December 7, 2023 by Northern Sword

[Alester Florent]

I think the parallel to Richard III is obvious, whether intended or not. Ned effectively fulfils the part of Richard III if he had played by the rules (with Renly as Hastings, I guess). Richard was appointed LP on Edward's death, with an underage heir who while he's been sanctified by posterity may in fact have been much more wilful, partisan and dangerous than we tend to assume (he was roughly the same age as Joffrey, after all, not an unwitting child). But Richard was isolated, without immediate allies in Westminster, and it didn't take a genius to see that they planned to make a clean sweep of the government on Edward's death. Richard, as the biggest obstacle, would either have to fall in line or would be eliminated.

So Richard struck first, making an alliance with Hastings to hit the Woodvilles before they realised he was even onto them. Once in power, he was then able to act on the Talbot precontract, annul Edward's marriage and have his children declared illegitimate. Although the geography of the situation in ASoIaF doesn't permit quite the same ruthless decapitation of the Lannisters as Richard accomplished with the Woodvilles and Greys, this is essentially the implication behind the Ned/Renly/LF composite plan.

The legitimacy of the precontract debate is questionable, especially since Henry VII destroyed all the documents relating to it. We don't know, for instance, if Richard knew about the Talbot allegations before Edward's death and whether that was always his plan, or whether they only came to light later. But in both cases we have a clear challenge to the legitimacy of the late king's apparent heir, one on legal grounds, one on biological, and realistically in both cases whether it sticks is going to come down to who's in power and writing the laws.

It is not a 1:1 comparison, because at some point in our parallel timeline where Ned actually does become LP, he and Stannis swap roles, with Stannis becoming Richard and Ned adopting the Buckingham role. One can imagine Ned enthusiastically supporting Stannis's accession (as Buckingham did Richard's) only to back away when the princes disappeared - it's hard to imagine Ned being keen on Stannis executing Cersei's kids, bastards or no. (Then again, Buckingham seems to have been a much less honourable figure in general than our Ned.) Either Ned or Stannis might have ditched Renly once his usefulness was at an immediate end, as Richard did Hastings (although hard to imagine Ned being so ruthless; I think that's a Stannis thing): Hastings no friend of the Woodvilles but still loyal principally to Edward IV's memory and confused about the political machinations surrounding the succession, much as Renly was an enthusiastic ally of Ned's against the Lannisters but didn't know about the incest.

And as the summary execution of Hastings was one of Richard's major mistakes IRL, so would the elimiantion of Renly been: a popular figure with important political connections whose death would have turned in this case the Tyrells and Stormlords, and possibly Crownlanders too, against Stannis, and led to an upswell of support for the "anyone but Stannis" candidate, in this case allowing Aegon and/or Daenerys to come in and take the throne as Henry VII did IRL.

Edited December 6, 2023 by Alester Florent

[Aebram]

 

Quote

if Bob had had any idea that Stannis was the heir he wouldn't have put in that "until they come of age" clause. 

If "Bob" had known that Cersei's children were fathered by Jaime, he probably would have had them all killed -- Jaime, Cersei, and their kids.  

 

 

[Alester Florent]

7 hours ago, Aebram said:

If "Bob" had known that Cersei's children were fathered by Jaime, he probably would have had them all killed -- Jaime, Cersei, and their kids. 

Well, sure, and he'd have been entirely justified in the case of Jaime and Cersei, and while what he'd have done to the kids remains speculative, Ned isn't prepared to risk it. Cersei is, mind, which I think is another reason to narrow one's eyes at those who claim Cersei's justified because she does everything for her kids.

That's not really the point, though. The "lawful heir" clause gives Ned an out for handing the throne to Stannis, but anyone who thinks about it will have some questions. The only reason not to name a successor in the will - something Robert, who despises Joffrey(!), still does - is if there's any question over their identity, which in this case Robert doesn't think there is. It might make sense for him to say "lawful successor" rather than Joffrey if he's making the will protectively, in advance when there's always a chance Joff will die, but not when he's on his deathbed and Joffrey is healthy.

The clause probably wouldn't draw attention at first, but once Ned hands the throne to Stannis, someone who knows the circumstances and is paying attention, one who is otherwise minded to honour the terms of the will (Renly, Barristan) would have cause to go "hang on a minute" and while it may not go public, it could still cause political problems.

The way Ned plays things, the will is his only real weapon (or shield) and it's literally paper-thin because it doesn't even have the substance of intention (on Robert's part) or conviction (on Ned's) behind it. It's something to use as a justification once you've already seized power, not your opening salvo in the battle to do so.

[frenin]

22 hours ago, Alester Florent said:

The clause probably wouldn't draw attention at first, but once Ned hands the throne to Stannis, someone who knows the circumstances and is paying attention, one who is otherwise minded to honour the terms of the will (Renly, Barristan) would have cause to go "hang on a minute" and while it may not go public, it could still cause political problems.

Often wonder how events would have unfold had Robert not forgotten about his bastards. I can see Renly using Edric as a shield.

[sifth]

Ned would have made such a great Lord Protector; at least until GRRM came up with ways for all his good actions to actually be bad ones. It is sort of his thing, lol

[Northern Sword]

On 12/7/2023 at 5:42 AM, Alester Florent said:

Well, sure, and he'd have been entirely justified in the case of Jaime and Cersei, and while what he'd have done to the kids remains speculative, Ned isn't prepared to risk it. Cersei is, mind, which I think is another reason to narrow one's eyes at those who claim Cersei's justified because she does everything for her kids.

Agreed.

I've long thought that her motivations are no where near so pure, as this theme that it is all for her kids.

She is a psychopath and a narcissist. Who, similar to Tywin, seems to love the power, status and the control that comes with being Queen or Regent. Her motivations are selfish, nothing more. Again, similar to Tywin, her kids are tools to achieve political goals. Cersei's whole character revolves around using people. Including her kids.

[Alester Florent]

4 hours ago, frenin said:

Often wonder how events would have unfold had Robert not forgotten about his bastards. I can see Renly using Edric as a shield.

I have wondered to what extent Robert did forget about his bastards as opposed to deliberately distancing himself from them for their own safety. Mya remembers him - not well enough to identify him, but he visited and played with her, while she was old enough to remember. He arranges - via Varys - for Gendry's apprenticeship, getting him a good trade. He shows an interest, if a remote one, in Edric. Barra he doesn't get a chance to know, and he's probably unaware of Bella. We don't know about any of his others, save the Casterly Rock ones which again he might not be aware of.

I think it's possible to read his suggestion of bringing Mya to court as wanting to have a closer and more open relationship with his bastard children, but since Cersei shut that down by threatening her, he's decided to take a step back for his kids' own safety. This may be one of the reasons Robert is so embittered and depressed, because thanks to Cersei he's been prevented from having a meaningful relationship with any of his children (including his supposedly legitimate ones), and although Joffrey is eager for his approval, Joffrey is so awful that Robert has trouble recognising any of himself in him (for a good reason, it turns out).

I'm reminded of Tony Soprano's comments about his father: the young Robert we hear about was a generous, big-hearted man, "he was tough, he ran his own crew. Guy like that, [and she] wore him down to a little nub".

[Ser Arthurs Dawn]

56 minutes ago, Northern Sword said:

Agreed.

I've long thought that her motivations are no where near so pure, as this theme that it is all for her kids.

She is a psychopath and a narcissist. Who, similar to Tywin, seems to love the power, status and the control that comes with being Queen or Regent. Her motivations are selfish, nothing more. Again, similar to Tywin, her kids are tools to achieve political goals. Cersei's whole character revolves around using people. Including her kids.

Right. In her mind, she's the female equivalent of Tywin. Would Tywin flee for the sake of his children? Hell no. Fleeing would make them look and feel weak. Can't be having that now.

Edited December 8, 2023 by Ser Arthurs Dawn

[Alester Florent]

1 hour ago, Ser Arthurs Dawn said:

Right. In her mind, she's the female equivalent of Tywin. Would Tywin flee for the sake of his children? Hell no. Fleeing would make them look and feel weak. Can't be having that now.

The threat posed to Cersei at that point might give Tywin pause, of course. He's proud, but not stupid, and he's a calculating guy. He wouldn't have fled into exile, but he might have headed to Casterly Rock to be on the safe side, as Renly does with his own powerbase.

With the benefit of hindsight, it's easy to miss how extreme Cersei's gamble is. I know we're supposed to believe that she gave the order to kill Robert after Ned's warning, but I'm not sure the timeline for that actually works. And even with Robert dead, she is still incredibly vulnerable. She is essentially saved by a combination of luck (LF's defection, Sansa's warning) and Ned's own incompetence at executing his plan. She doesn't really do anything proactively, just sits back and watches Ned's plan collapse.

She doesn't even hedge. If Cersei's gamble doesn't pay off, it's game over: she's off the board, as are all her children. It takes Tyrion to see that having all three of her children in a tenuously-held city is an unacceptable risk and take steps to (a) protect the younger ones and (b) ensure that all their eggs aren't in one basket, so if the capital or Red Keep falls, the cause survives.

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

On 12/8/2023 at 11:51 PM, Alester Florent said:

I have wondered to what extent Robert did forget about his bastards as opposed to deliberately distancing himself from them for their own safety. Mya remembers him - not well enough to identify him, but he visited and played with her, while she was old enough to remember. He arranges - via Varys - for Gendry's apprenticeship, getting him a good trade. He shows an interest, if a remote one, in Edric. Barra he doesn't get a chance to know, and he's probably unaware of Bella. We don't know about any of his others, save the Casterly Rock ones which again he might not be aware of.

I think it's possible to read his suggestion of bringing Mya to court as wanting to have a closer and more open relationship with his bastard children, but since Cersei shut that down by threatening her, he's decided to take a step back for his kids' own safety. This may be one of the reasons Robert is so embittered and depressed, because thanks to Cersei he's been prevented from having a meaningful relationship with any of his children (including his supposedly legitimate ones), and although Joffrey is eager for his approval, Joffrey is so awful that Robert has trouble recognising any of himself in him (for a good reason, it turns out).

I'm reminded of Tony Soprano's comments about his father: the young Robert we hear about was a generous, big-hearted man, "he was tough, he ran his own crew. Guy like that, [and she] wore him down to a little nub".

I've noticed a trend for you to put a lot on Cersei even when she is only loosely connected, lol. Do you remember that Robert (thinks) he has 3 legitimate children...and does basically jack shit nothing to raise them? Even if you want say Joffrey is kind of messed up so Robert distanced himself.....Myrcella and Tommen are essentially angels. Robert, from what we know, takes as little interest in them as he does Joffrey. 

I'm not saying his relationship with Cersei was healthy...it wasn't. But....bro, not everything bad that happens in this world is on Cersei, lol. Jaime and Robert do there own share of bad things, and we can't jsut put that on Cersei. Listen, I've had toxic relationships including girlfriends. I didn't suddenly become a bad person because of them, lol. I was still me. They negatively affected me, my self esteem especially...but that didn't suddenly change my personality or make me into a different person. However, again, it's easy to use a toxic person as an excuse. "I drank because _____ was encouraging me," rather than recognizing it was still my choice. I think in this case, you are giving Robert and Jaime outs for their own decisions. Cersei doesn't want Maya at court? Robert is King. Go. Visit. Her. Fun thing, according to the wiki I just searched, Storm's End and King's Landing are two weeks apart travel. So...again, Robert, a King who goes hunting for two weeks (it literally happened in our books)...could have visited Edric Storm...pretty much anytime he wanted, and he didn't. His choice. Not Cersei's. 

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

On 12/9/2023 at 2:01 AM, Alester Florent said:

The threat posed to Cersei at that point might give Tywin pause, of course. He's proud, but not stupid, and he's a calculating guy. He wouldn't have fled into exile, but he might have headed to Casterly Rock to be on the safe side, as Renly does with his own powerbase.

With the benefit of hindsight, it's easy to miss how extreme Cersei's gamble is. I know we're supposed to believe that she gave the order to kill Robert after Ned's warning, but I'm not sure the timeline for that actually works. And even with Robert dead, she is still incredibly vulnerable. She is essentially saved by a combination of luck (LF's defection, Sansa's warning) and Ned's own incompetence at executing his plan. She doesn't really do anything proactively, just sits back and watches Ned's plan collapse.

She doesn't even hedge. If Cersei's gamble doesn't pay off, it's game over: she's off the board, as are all her children. It takes Tyrion to see that having all three of her children in a tenuously-held city is an unacceptable risk and take steps to (a) protect the younger ones and (b) ensure that all their eggs aren't in one basket, so if the capital or Red Keep falls, the cause survives.

I would not go this far. Cersei played her cards probably the best she could from what we see. However, I agree she gets lucky. I think we assume because Eddard loses that he was meant to lose, but I've before gone through all the choices he could have made which would have ended up with him winning and there were a lot. He literally made like....7 choices or something that led to him losing. The thing was he was actually in the better position than Cersei. He was Hand of the King, he was named Lord Protector, and he had not only his own base to call his power from, but also his wife is the daughter of another Lord Paramount. If he hadn't been an idiot, he also could have allied with Renly..essentially meaning Eddard *could* have instantly had access to 3 different Kingdoms armies...while as Cersei only had the Westerlands. 

So do I think Cersei got lucky? Yes, but not because she is stupid...because she should have lost just by the nature of her position. Now, was Cersei stupid later in the books? Yes. But before she got into the position of power she has by AFfC, she was more careful. She sees herself currently as untouchable, which makes her stupid, lol. She recognized both Eddard's, and I'd argue Renly and Stannis as well, ability to actually win, so she was more careful. 

P.s. One more thing - If Eddard was just a different person, he would have won, lol. Only Eddard could have lost, lol. GRRM wrote a character that would lose basically, lol. I think almost any other character would have won. Jon Arryn, with the same situation probably wins. Barristan Selmy, probably wins. Stannis, probably wins. Renly wins easily (because he is smarter than your favorite character, this is just me trying to piss off Stannis-stans now). etc. etc. I don't think Eddard is stupid, but...his personality and his decisions are really the only way to lose, lol. I guess an actively stupid character could lose as well, but if they were around Eddard's intelligence...only by being Eddard could they lose. 

Edited December 10, 2023 by Lord of Raventree Hall

[Northern Sword]

20 hours ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

I've noticed a trend for you to put a lot on Cersei even when she is only loosely connected, lol. Do you remember that Robert (thinks) he has 3 legitimate children...and does basically jack shit nothing to raise them? Even if you want say Joffrey is kind of messed up so Robert distanced himself.....Myrcella and Tommen are essentially angels. Robert, from what we know, takes as little interest in them as he does Joffrey. 

I'm not saying his relationship with Cersei was healthy...it wasn't. But....bro, not everything bad that happens in this world is on Cersei, lol. Jaime and Robert do there own share of bad things, and we can't jsut put that on Cersei. Listen, I've had toxic relationships including girlfriends. I didn't suddenly become a bad person because of them, lol. I was still me. They negatively affected me, my self esteem especially...but that didn't suddenly change my personality or make me into a different person. However, again, it's easy to use a toxic person as an excuse. "I drank because _____ was encouraging me," rather than recognizing it was still my choice. I think in this case, you are giving Robert and Jaime outs for their own decisions. Cersei doesn't want Maya at court? Robert is King. Go. Visit. Her. Fun thing, according to the wiki I just searched, Storm's End and King's Landing are two weeks apart travel. So...again, Robert, a King who goes hunting for two weeks (it literally happened in our books)...could have visited Edric Storm...pretty much anytime he wanted, and he didn't. His choice. Not Cersei's. 

Cersei competes for Most Toxic character in all of ASOIAF. She is right up there with Ramsay, Euron and Hot Pie.

She isn't at fault for everything in the world, only everything she touches.

She clearly had a tremendous influence on Jamie. His whole life path of the Kings Guard was by Cersei's doing, as well as everything that followed for the most part. Once he left Kings Landing(Cersei's influence) and was around a Stark and Brienne he changed paths. Clearly he isn't some innocent either, but he started changing for the better when she wasn't around. 

Bobby B was a drunk and loved whores, but he also won over enemies to his side. Cersei's influence on him was toxic as well, his kids aren't even his for gods sake. And she was actively trying to kill him. She was likely trying to control Robert similarly to Jamie. But he was King and he just didn't want to deal with her, so he went drinking.

Even her precious Joffrey was a raised to be a psychopath. Her family didn't trust her. Look at her "friends" like Falyse.. yikes. Not to mention Lancel or Roberts kids that she killed. All she does is use and abuse people in her life. 

Whatever and whoever she is connected to, she is the toxic component.

I'm actually trying to think of a single time or event, where an interaction with her was positive. Trying to say, well Bob didn't go see his kids as a way to absolve Cersei using, abusing, fucking and murdering everyone around her for her own amusement is crazy.

Robert and Jamie were not saints by any measure, but they are not anywhere near the monster she is. 

Loosely connected or not. She is the worst. 

[Buried Treasure]

On 12/7/2023 at 11:42 AM, Alester Florent said:

 

That's not really the point, though. The "lawful heir" clause gives Ned an out for handing the throne to Stannis, but anyone who thinks about it will have some questions. The only reason not to name a successor in the will - something Robert, who despises Joffrey(!), still does - is if there's any question over their identity, which in this case Robert doesn't think there is. It might make sense for him to say "lawful successor" rather than Joffrey if he's making the will protectively, in advance when there's always a chance Joff will die, but not when he's on his deathbed and Joffrey is healthy.

I don't agree that in Robert's mind he was naming a successor. He wasn't declaring a will for that reason, but rather to name Ned as regent, and would not have been dictating anything if Joff was already of age.

So the 'lawful heir' clause isn't an out for Ned to hand the throne to Stannis - it's already Stannis' by the laws of succession. It was an out Ned used so there was a lawful document saying who had temporary charge of KL until King Stannis arrived. A will from Robert declaring Ned as regent for King Joffrey would be legally meaningless as there legally is no King Joffrey.