Pre wot5k Strongest control of a region by a house.

[astarkchoice]

Just random (bored thoughts ) about the level of control a house has over  their region/vassals with very very rough ranking.

1) lannisters of casterly rock over westerlands. Lets see they are longtime historic rulers of the region , already had richest goldmine  with 0 signs of running out , by far strongest keep, multiple smaller intermarried off shoots control major port city , 2 strongest rivals recently exterminated handing over their gold+ silver to the rock  ,  head of household (tywin) established brutaly his dominace and has established not only links to monarchy but a minor house(clegane)with 2 feared brute enforcers!! 

2) greyjoys of pyke: balon won kingsmoot and had become a virtual legend  as a youth. Married into arguably the only house to rival the greyjoys in power. Damaged his rep.badly with a failed rebelliom costing him.the sons thay could have been married off to seal.their power for centuries.

Recovered  influence as one brother is considered their finest reaver, another one is still one of their top warriors and controls the iron fleet and yet another is head of their religion sealing up a lot of control and prestige. Daughter has earned respect as both captain and warrior (her lover one of the ironborns fiercest warriors)  and their in laws lesser house now has one of the islands finest warriors (the knight).

3)starks of winterfell: lost a lot of power since being forced to surrender the gift  and its deterioration  and as we know bolton and possibly dusin/ryswll not to be trusted. That said the starks hold.arguably.one of the richest lands and most powerful northern  keep, their blood relatives karstarks are one of the most powerful.houses and both  houses manderly (the richest house with biggest population centre and only real sea power) and mormont owe them everything!!  (one of the 2  house flints only exist on land the starks  took back from ironborn too but we dont hear much of them). They have a storried history protecting the wall side by side with house umber vs kings beyond the wall   and with many sons joining the watch. They personaly subdued and/or hold he loyalty of the more savage regions (crannogmen, skagos, clansmen) and their current lord ned had large family to marry off ,personaly well loved and respected on top.of links to the king and powerful lords ...even rumours of him personaly killing ser aurthur dayne to add to the baddassry of his storied generalship. Add in a ward of the greyjoys in his grasp thus could in theory have coastal enemies raided. 

Overall massive hard and soft power over the northern lords

4) tyrell of the reach: upjumped but thanks to various marriages now well tied into the reachs most powerful houses with a new unmarried generation to tie it up  further. Loras fame as a knight with his older brother secretly better adds to their image only the powerful  florent claim to the reach knocks them down a rank or 2 in terms of utter control

5)martells of dorne: admitedly  their rise to power is entirely caused by the rhoynar marring into them and choosing them to be lords of dorne but  they have over time established their hold.  Recently the houses  seeming weakness is actualy strength as we know doran and the viper work in cahoots...one is the seemingly reasonable face  of dorne the other the focal point of any rage. Add in hotahs seemingly excellent intel network and the martells have dorne well in hand esp now their sons wardship has cooled the yornwood feud.

5) house baratheon of stormsend: handed to renly by robert its ranked lower than other only as its lord(renly) was handed the role by his older brother. That said over time he has established himself as a competent well.liked leader over the normaly hard to wrangle stormlords. Having his 2 big brothers being who they are doesnt hurt either

6) baratheon of dragonstone: stannis is a hard man and has wrangled the former targ loyalist islands into his power.unquestionably the strongedt keep and has a huge fleet.....only ranked low as such small  weak area the celtigars  wealth could be used to counter stannis if they were so inclined , with so few men on the islands it wouldnt take much for  a challenege to emerge ......if not for big brother on the crown and little brother across the water etc

7)baratheon of crownlands: king we know but this is contested across the water , in financial difficulties and we know many minor lords in the rougher  surrounding areas are all targ lovers.

8)tullys of riverrun: never  the strongest or richest of  roverlands houses  undermined by the constant blackwood-bracken  feuding and the freys  in general. A sickly lord with a  too kind hearted heir too.

9)arryns of the vale: seemingly less secure than we assumed due to both the heirs illness and the weakess of the eyrie to simply being starved out. Add in a growing drift between the ruling arryns and the multiple other minor  arryns (including the very wealthy one in gulltown)  those houses  probably  helped the main line take control of the vale in the 1st place . Add in the clans contesting control of areas and the sisters being their own virtual fiefdom (with lighthouse dutied being negelected by design too!!)

[Alester Florent]

You seem to have forgotten the Martells!

Pre-Wot5K, all the great houses seem to have a pretty much iron lock on their kingdoms, with the exceptions of Stannis, the Tullys and possibly the Tyrells. We don't get an insight into internal Lannister politics, but they seem to raise their entire feudal contingent without a problem at the war's start. The Starks get universal acceptance of their rebellion against the Iron Throne from their vassals, and apparently unanimous support for the declaration of independence. The trivial pushback from the Umbers they get at the start is directed at Robb (then not the actual lord) and in any case immediately and permanently quashed, bolstering the Stark position in the process.

Despite his claim's being unquestionably the weakest of the three Baratheon challengers, Renly seems to muster the whole of the Stormlands without argument, and not one of his vassals defects to Stannis despite Stannis's having a better argument. We hear of no dissent within the onshore Crownlands that I recall. And Balon seems to bring the whole of the Iron Islands along with him without issue.

Lysa is able to keep the Vale out of the war with a word. Despite the apparent appetite on the part of the Vale lords to get the old band back together, not one of them goes against her wishes. The Martells likewise: even on the Marches there doesn't seem to be a peep out of those you might otherwise expect to take advantage of distraction by the Storm/Reach lords.

The exact strength of the Tyrell position is unclear, but it seems they may not have quite such tight control over the Florents and Hightowers as they might ideally like. The Tullys obviously have a Frey problem. And while Stannis seems to command personal loyalty, his decision to abandon the Seven and burn the Sept alienates some supporters, with the Sunglasses for instance opposing him.

With the house whose internal support collapses most spectacularly - the Starks - this was I think largely if not entirely a product of the war itself and not an indictment of their prewar position, which was extremely strong. Robb makes a few well-known strategic errors which alienate key allies and erode his authority. In an alternative scenario, one where he doesn't lose Winterfell to Theon, doesn't marry Jeyne Westerling, and Cat doesn't release Jaime from captivity, it's likely that the Karstarks, Freys and Boltons remain on side, and any remaining cracks are easily patched as they appear, as with the Umbers.

Elsewhere, the same pattern seems to hold. Outside the Sunglasses, Stannis only loses support when he basically loses the war. The Tullys go down with the Starks. Any waverings in the Westerlands are triggered by Robb's invasion. Arianne's "rebellion" against Doran is triggered by events in the war, too. The Greyjoys seem to be fine in the Iron Islands until Balon's death, at which point other houses feel able to challenge for the throne, albeit the key protagonists in the Kingsmoot are all Greyjoys themselves.

While I don't think ranking is an exact science, I'd posit a rough order, taking into account issues not apparent at the time, of:

1) Lannister
2) Arryn
3) Stark
4) Baratheon of Storm's End
5) Martell
6) Greyjoy
7) Baratheon of King's Landing
8) Tyrell
9) Baratheon of Dragonstone
10) Tully

I think one could bump Baratheon of Storm's End up a bit, but I'm allowing for the fact that some Stormlords did at least meet with Stannis's guys, even if none of them sided with him. But it's also worth noting that BoSE and Stark retain lasting loyalty from some of their vassals even after the house itself is believed extinct (in BoSE's case, despite its being the youngest great house!) That tells us something, too.

[astarkchoice]

2 hours ago, Alester Florent said:

You seem to have forgotten the Martells!

Pre-Wot5K, all the great houses seem to have a pretty much iron lock on their kingdoms, with the exceptions of Stannis, the Tullys and possibly the Tyrells. We don't get an insight into internal Lannister politics, but they seem to raise their entire feudal contingent without a problem at the war's start. The Starks get universal acceptance of their rebellion against the Iron Throne from their vassals, and apparently unanimous support for the declaration of independence. The trivial pushback from the Umbers they get at the start is directed at Robb (then not the actual lord) and in any case immediately and permanently quashed, bolstering the Stark position in the process.

Despite his claim's being unquestionably the weakest of the three Baratheon challengers, Renly seems to muster the whole of the Stormlands without argument, and not one of his vassals defects to Stannis despite Stannis's having a better argument. We hear of no dissent within the onshore Crownlands that I recall. And Balon seems to bring the whole of the Iron Islands along with him without issue.

Lysa is able to keep the Vale out of the war with a word. Despite the apparent appetite on the part of the Vale lords to get the old band back together, not one of them goes against her wishes. The Martells likewise: even on the Marches there doesn't seem to be a peep out of those you might otherwise expect to take advantage of distraction by the Storm/Reach lords.

The exact strength of the Tyrell position is unclear, but it seems they may not have quite such tight control over the Florents and Hightowers as they might ideally like. The Tullys obviously have a Frey problem. And while Stannis seems to command personal loyalty, his decision to abandon the Seven and burn the Sept alienates some supporters, with the Sunglasses for instance opposing him.

With the house whose internal support collapses most spectacularly - the Starks - this was I think largely if not entirely a product of the war itself and not an indictment of their prewar position, which was extremely strong. Robb makes a few well-known strategic errors which alienate key allies and erode his authority. In an alternative scenario, one where he doesn't lose Winterfell to Theon, doesn't marry Jeyne Westerling, and Cat doesn't release Jaime from captivity, it's likely that the Karstarks, Freys and Boltons remain on side, and any remaining cracks are easily patched as they appear, as with the Umbers.

Elsewhere, the same pattern seems to hold. Outside the Sunglasses, Stannis only loses support when he basically loses the war. The Tullys go down with the Starks. Any waverings in the Westerlands are triggered by Robb's invasion. Arianne's "rebellion" against Doran is triggered by events in the war, too. The Greyjoys seem to be fine in the Iron Islands until Balon's death, at which point other houses feel able to challenge for the throne, albeit the key protagonists in the Kingsmoot are all Greyjoys themselves.

While I don't think ranking is an exact science, I'd posit a rough order, taking into account issues not apparent at the time, of:

1) Lannister
2) Arryn
3) Stark
4) Baratheon of Storm's End
5) Martell
6) Greyjoy
7) Baratheon of King's Landing
8) Tyrell
9) Baratheon of Dragonstone
10) Tully

I think one could bump Baratheon of Storm's End up a bit, but I'm allowing for the fact that some Stormlords did at least meet with Stannis's guys, even if none of them sided with him. But it's also worth noting that BoSE and Stark retain lasting loyalty from some of their vassals even after the house itself is believed extinct (in BoSE's case, despite its being the youngest great house!) That tells us something, too.

Yeah its not an exact science so many position could be intermixed

The arryns though id still say have one of the weaker holds. They clearly won the vale though many of the minor offshoots of house arryn that the main branch has slowly distanced from (stupidly the rich ome in gulltowm too)  , they clearly dont have full control of the pass to their won lands as is disputed by the clans , lysas hold is held together by boy who is one fit away from a coffin at any moment AND LFs secret corruption of many of the lords around her.

[Alester Florent]

Well it depends what question you're asking. Are you asking "who has the strongest control over their region?" or "who is the most vulnerable should something go wrong?" 

On paper, the Starks are one of the most secure houses at the start of ASoIaF. Ned should have plenty left in the tank and he has three sons. Only the Tyrells have multiple adult male heirs, and the Starks don't go round riding in tourneys or whatever and running the risk of getting a lance in their face.

As you say, Sweetrobin is sickly and this is a potential problem for ultimate Arryn control of the Vale. Renly has no obvious heir at all, and Stannis's isn't exactly a banker. Robert has (by common understanding) two legitimate sons, but neither is an adult, Robert knows Joff is a liability, and indeed upon his death Cersei and Joffrey completely dismantle the standing and credibility of BoKL. If something happens to Tywin, control of the Westerlands is going to be subject to a heatedly disputed succession between his two eligible children. Doran's succession is also likely to be disputed, and Balon's even more so.

Only Ned, Mace and Hoster should really be sleeping easily regarding what'll happen should they fall off a horse or the like. But none of this seems to have any real bearing on the great lords' ability to actually exert power over their respective kingdoms before the war makes a mess of everything.

[astarkchoice]

19 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Well it depends what question you're asking. Are you asking "who has the strongest control over their region?" or "who is the most vulnerable should something go wrong?" 

On paper, the Starks are one of the most secure houses at the start of ASoIaF. Ned should have plenty left in the tank and he has three sons. Only the Tyrells have multiple adult male heirs, and the Starks don't go round riding in tourneys or whatever and running the risk of getting a lance in their face.

As you say, Sweetrobin is sickly and this is a potential problem for ultimate Arryn control of the Vale. Renly has no obvious heir at all, and Stannis's isn't exactly a banker. Robert has (by common understanding) two legitimate sons, but neither is an adult, Robert knows Joff is a liability, and indeed upon his death Cersei and Joffrey completely dismantle the standing and credibility of BoKL. If something happens to Tywin, control of the Westerlands is going to be subject to a heatedly disputed succession between his two eligible children. Doran's succession is also likely to be disputed, and Balon's even more so.

Only Ned, Mace and Hoster should really be sleeping easily regarding what'll happen should they fall off a horse or the like. But none of this seems to have any real bearing on the great lords' ability to actually exert power over their respective kingdoms before the war makes a mess of everything.

Its who has strongest most stable control or sorts  if the kingdoms became 7 seperate ones again which house has firmest control over their region.

Hoster by books start is sickly and his house isnt the strongest or richest of that area by a longshot..their family control is weak. The westerlands control  by contrast (bar a huge massacre)  is itterly tied up with golden haired assholes, from casterly rock all the way to lannisport!

[Alester Florent]

2 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

Its who has strongest most stable control or sorts  if the kingdoms became 7 seperate ones again which house has firmest control over their region.

Hoster by books start is sickly and his house isnt the strongest or richest of that area by a longshot..their family control is weak. The westerlands control  by contrast (bar a huge massacre)  is itterly tied up with golden haired assholes, from casterly rock all the way to lannisport!

There are lots of male Lannisters, but unless Tywin amends the succession, only Tyrion is in the direct line of succession, and Tywin seems to want to cut him out. After Tyrion, his heir is Cersei and after that her children. Tywin apparently hasn't clarified the succession so the most likely outcome is an argument between Cersei and Tyrion. On the basis there's a dispute, which there surely would be, the king can decide, but on the basis that Tywin would expect Robert to still be king by the time of his death, the most likely successor to Tywin is probably Tommen. Obviously we know that the BoKL kids are actually Lannisters, but on paper at the start of the series, house Lannister is realistically due to lose Casterly Rock pretty soon. 

There's a degree of early instalment weirdness in all this. You'd expect someone as diligent and careful as Tywin to have got this sorted out because it's an easily foreseeable problem. It's not clear that GRRM had made up his mind on whether women can inherit at the start of the books when this was immediately relevant. But Tywin still seems to be pinning his hopes on somehow getting Jaime to succeed him, which is a legal impossibility, and so long as he keeps waiting for that to happen, he's ignoring the realities of the problem. And indeed it does all go to toss after he dies, even without Tyrion around to interfere. 

Hoster may be ill but he at least has a solid, competent, undisputed male heir who's reached the age of majority. (I don't buy this "Edmure is too soft" business; he'd defeated Tywin on the battlefield and psychologically shrugged off the effects of two periods of captivity, one of them particularly obnoxious). The Tully succession, qua Tully, is more secure than the Lannister one, I think. 

This is why the question of "control of the region" and "stability of the succession" are I think two fundamentally different questions. 

[astarkchoice]

17 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

There are lots of male Lannisters, but unless Tywin amends the succession, only Tyrion is in the direct line of succession, and Tywin seems to want to cut him out. After Tyrion, his heir is Cersei and after that her children. Tywin apparently hasn't clarified the succession so the most likely outcome is an argument between Cersei and Tyrion. On the basis there's a dispute, which there surely would be, the king can decide, but on the basis that Tywin would expect Robert to still be king by the time of his death, the most likely successor to Tywin is probably Tommen. Obviously we know that the BoKL kids are actually Lannisters, but on paper at the start of the series, house Lannister is realistically due to lose Casterly Rock pretty soon. 

There's a degree of early instalment weirdness in all this. You'd expect someone as diligent and careful as Tywin to have got this sorted out because it's an easily foreseeable problem. It's not clear that GRRM had made up his mind on whether women can inherit at the start of the books when this was immediately relevant. But Tywin still seems to be pinning his hopes on somehow getting Jaime to succeed him, which is a legal impossibility, and so long as he keeps waiting for that to happen, he's ignoring the realities of the problem. And indeed it does all go to toss after he dies, even without Tyrion around to interfere. 

Hoster may be ill but he at least has a solid, competent, undisputed male heir who's reached the age of majority. (I don't buy this "Edmure is too soft" business; he'd defeated Tywin on the battlefield and psychologically shrugged off the effects of two periods of captivity, one of them particularly obnoxious). The Tully succession, qua Tully, is more secure than the Lannister one, I think. 

This is why the question of "control of the region" and "stability of the succession" are I think two fundamentally different questions. 

Tyrion is direct yes but the likes of tywin can choose to leave it to a more competent nephew  or grandchild if he so chooses it is his personal fiefdom to leave as he wishes. Either way the lanisters themselves have the region locked up as they have casterly rock, lannisport  the former tarbeck and reynes mines too and the recently raised cleganes. I think he thought hes browbeat jamie into giving up the kingsguard!! 

My point with hoster is the tullys arent a strong house , theres.no way if the crown suddenly vanished theyd remain in control of their region basicaly......they field neither the strongest forces, richest nor even. have they  the strongest keep. Other houses that rule regions have wrested control and kept it for centuries but the tullys wouldnt be capable.of doing the same.

[Alester Florent]

Tywin certainly could make a will to settle his affairs on Kevan or the like, but he hasn't. So if he dies suddenly, say from an attack of diarrhoea, or his son shooting him with a crossbow, he's leaving behind a disputed succession. 

I do see what you mean about the Lannisters versus the Tullys, though. I suspect the Tullys might be able to hold the Riverlands for a bit on the basis that they're pretty inoffensive, though, and are therefore an acceptable compromise candidate to the other major houses of the Riverlands, particularly the Brackens and Blackwoods. The Tullys also have an advantage which the Lannisters don't: a strong alliance with a neighbouring great house (in fact, two!) If the Freys - the most powerful house in the Riverlands, and probably the one most likely to rise up against Tully rule in the aftermath of a 7K breakup - rebelled, Edmure could call on support from this brothers-in-law and between them they could quite easily smash the Freys and either take the Twins for themselves or at the least install a pliable Frey ruler at the Twins who'll more reliably support them (with encouragement by taking hostages and wards, of course). Then the addition of the Frey strength to the Tullys would be sufficient to overmatch any other Riverlands house. While that's not exactly native Tully strength, it's certainly a factor that can't be discounted. 

[astarkchoice]

18 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Tywin certainly could make a will to settle his affairs on Kevan or the like, but he hasn't. So if he dies suddenly, say from an attack of diarrhoea, or his son shooting him with a crossbow, he's leaving behind a disputed succession. 

I do see what you mean about the Lannisters versus the Tullys, though. I suspect the Tullys might be able to hold the Riverlands for a bit on the basis that they're pretty inoffensive, though, and are therefore an acceptable compromise candidate to the other major houses of the Riverlands, particularly the Brackens and Blackwoods. The Tullys also have an advantage which the Lannisters don't: a strong alliance with a neighbouring great house (in fact, two!) If the Freys - the most powerful house in the Riverlands, and probably the one most likely to rise up against Tully rule in the aftermath of a 7K breakup - rebelled, Edmure could call on support from this brothers-in-law and between them they could quite easily smash the Freys and either take the Twins for themselves or at the least install a pliable Frey ruler at the Twins who'll more reliably support them (with encouragement by taking hostages and wards, of course). Then the addition of the Frey strength to the Tullys would be sufficient to overmatch any other Riverlands house. While that's not exactly native Tully strength, it's certainly a factor that can't be discounted. 

Hes not really  tyrion would assert his claim and as we have seen despite mockery due tk his dwarfism hes a cunning and ruthless little.shit so hed secure it in no time , but if tyrion has a little 'accident ' the lannisters still rule..theor hold is absolute. It takes an incredible.sequence of events to make their dynasty  unstable.as we see by final books end

 

Bur no.my overall.point was control without any outside help, the starks for example hold the north as they have battered down all rivals and stitched up control.of the north whereas the tullys didnt and simply couldnt even if they had to ,  say if  the crown magicaly vanished and all 7 kingdoms.went back to 7 independent  states with a free for all for dominance is what i mean.

Edited March 1 by astarkchoice

[Alester Florent]

I don't think you can just treat the seven kingdoms as each existing in a vacuum, though. The relations between the great houses is a key factor, irrespective of the dominance of the crown, if nothing else because geography is important in determining relative power structures within a given kingdom. 

The Freys, for example, are rich and powerful because they control a key crossing, but if you ignore the Vale and the North, that crossing doesn't really go anywhere. In Riverlands terms it's out on a limb and can be cut around to the south. Most of its importance is because that crossing is strategically important given the proximity to the North and the Vale. Which in turn means that the Starks and Arryns have an interest in what happens at the Twins whether they're already allied to the Tullys or not. And the ability to keep the Freys in line may have been a reason why Hoster formed alliances with those houses in the first place. 

Simply abolishing the crown is one thing, but cutting off cross-border politics as an applicable factor renders the entire exercise unhelpfully artificial, because the great lords will have managed their alliance network for generations with at least one eye on managing their own vassals.

[astarkchoice]

16 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

I don't think you can just treat the seven kingdoms as each existing in a vacuum, though. The relations between the great houses is a key factor, irrespective of the dominance of the crown, if nothing else because geography is important in determining relative power structures within a given kingdom. 

The Freys, for example, are rich and powerful because they control a key crossing, but if you ignore the Vale and the North, that crossing doesn't really go anywhere. In Riverlands terms it's out on a limb and can be cut around to the south. Most of its importance is because that crossing is strategically important given the proximity to the North and the Vale. Which in turn means that the Starks and Arryns have an interest in what happens at the Twins whether they're already allied to the Tullys or not. And the ability to keep the Freys in line may have been a reason why Hoster formed alliances with those houses in the first place. 

Simply abolishing the crown is one thing, but cutting off cross-border politics as an applicable factor renders the entire exercise unhelpfully artificial, because the great lords will have managed their alliance network for generations with at least one eye on managing their own vassals.

Yeah but remember the tullys and tyrells didnt earn domiance of their region through force or even alliances of forces they got handed it by an outside force with flying flamethrowers utterly beyond any power there.  Hoster i suspect like the other lords began to for the 1st time marry off to the masters of other regions to solidify power and wrest it from an unstable madman or before that a simpe acknoledgement that the targs wernt the power they once where and their utter dominace of westeros was over.