What was the single most stupid decesion any character made?

[ríomhaire]

Robb allowing himself to be declared "King in the North" and attempting to add the riverlands to that Kingdom. Had Robb declared for Renly they could have crushed Tywin.

In fairness to Robb, it wasn't his idea and he was pretty much forced into it by his lords. Had he declined he probably would have lost all of their respect. A lot of them seemed pretty adamant about not bending knee to a Southern king any more.

[Headless Ned]

Ser Scott... good point. I agree

I can see their next council ending with both being dead d/t killers in shadows though... stupid stannis

[Lasty]

Probably not the absolute worst decision in the books, but it seems that the only time that Stannis ever listened to his wife was when she urged him not to seek alliance with the North and the Vale. It most likely wouldn't have worked for him (for the Vale at least), but it should have been worth trying.

[CelticBrennus]

In fairness this worked out pretty well for the Lannisters, if he doesn't and Ned is exchanged for Jaime, Starks in much stronger position

Robb marched when Ned was taken prisoner during the coup. Ned was still alive until after Jaime was taken prisoner, and even Tywin remarks that the execution was idiotic since otherwise they could have traded Jaime for Ned and Sansa. War over. Everyone goes home and tensions build until something else sets things off.

[JaimeLannister]

Robb marched when Ned was taken prisoner during the coup. Ned was still alive until after Jaime was taken prisoner, and even Tywin remarks that the execution was idiotic since otherwise they could have traded Jaime for Ned and Sansa. War over. Everyone goes home and tensions build until something else sets things off.

The way i see it, Ned declares for Stannis

Lannisters = fucked

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

riomhaire,

In fairness to Robb, it wasn't his idea and he was pretty much forced into it by his lords. Had he declined he probably would have lost all of their respect. A lot of them seemed pretty adamant about not bending knee to a Southern king any more.

I understand but I think about this in the sense of what would Ned have done if he had led the army that beat Jamie. He'd have calmly told his bannermen that making him KITN wouldn't make sense and would do nothing but alienate those who they needed to finish off the Lannisters. Heck if Robb had declared for Stannis it would have given Stannis the support he needed to perhaps hold onto the Stormlords and make Renly reconsider his rash decision to declare himself king. It may have allowed everyone to focus on the Lannisters.

That said Robb isn't Ned. He didn't have Ned's experience and stoicism. Allowing himself to be declared KITN is perfectly understandable for a teenager angry about what happened to his father and puffed up from a victory over one of the realm's legendary fighters.

[Headless Ned]

How about the bad calls of other commanders underestimating Robb? Only way they beat him was off the field of battle.

And furthermre, why did they ever trust the Freys anyway?? Cat should have known that any agreeement she reached with them would be broke as soon as if was more convieniet to do so.

[JaimeLannister]

And furthermre, why did they ever trust the Freys anyway?? Cat should have known that any agreeement she reached with them would be broke as soon as if was more convieniet to do so.

Robb betrayed the Freys first

[trio]

I thought Cat's arrest of Tyrion was pretty bold, rash, and utterly off the top of her head, with no such thought as to what she would be able to do with him once she brought him to court.

Oh my God, yes. This to me, was the stupidest thing anyone did in the books. Why? Cos it started the whole damn war!

And she's so damn proud of herself for getting him, and never seems to think twice about how she, the wife of the Kings Hand, has just KIDNAPPED THE KINGS BROTHER IN LAW.

The shocking mindlessness and sheer cold-eyed arrogance of it......that was the moment when Catelyn completely lost me. Most people say it was when she said "It should have been you..." but not for me - that was interesting character nuance. But THIS??? She just kidnaps Tyrion on hearsay, and rather than bringing him back to the King to make him stand trial, she whisks him as far away from civilisation as she could get. What the HELL???

And afterwards, she never really seems to get it. Did she ever express regret for behaving so rashly in that situation? Does she ever wonder what kind of shit Ned got into over it? Does she ever connect Tywin marching out of retirement with her kidnapping of his son? Does she ever say "If only I'd delivered him to Kings Landing...."??

If you ask me, that stupid cow started the whole war and caused inumerable deaths.

There! I've said it! :angry2:

[Lady Blackfish]

And furthermre, why did they ever trust the Freys anyway??

They trusted the Freys to support them in exchange for a certain price, which the Freys were willing to do. They had to make the deal because of the Freys' strategic locale and the number of men they could field.

And afterwards, she never really seems to get it. Did she ever express regret for behaving so rashly in that situation? Does she ever wonder what kind of shit Ned got into over it? Does she ever connect Tywin marching out of retirement with her kidnapping of his son?

It was your doing, yours, a voice whispered inside her. If you had not taken it upon yourself to seize the dwarf ...

I would think the rest is self explanatory without us needing to read about her dwelling on it. It follows without say.

[The Gallows Knight]

The really sad thing is that several individuals could have done things different to prevent the current troubles.

Rhaegar maybe shouldn't have run off with Lyanna and not told anyone what the hell he was up to (lyanna maybe shouldn't have run off with a married man)

Aerys maybe shouldn't have burned all those people alive and then demand Robert and Ned's heads.

Jon Arryn maybe shouldn't have told Robert to marry Cersei and given every villain in Kings Landing a job.

Cersei shouldn't have sleep with her brother, Jaime shouldn't have sleep with his sister.

Ned shouldn't have told Cersei that he was going to stop her.

Cat shouldn't have kidnapped Tyrion.

Joffrey shouldn't have killed Ned.

Renly and Stannis should have backed up Ned. Renly should have backed up his brother.

Robb should never have allowed himself to be called the king in the north.

And hell, if that young Hightower hadn't farted in front of Elia and Oberyn we wouldn't have been in this mess.

The current problems in the seven kingdoms are directly the result of collective bad decision making and bad luck.

[AvengingAryaFan]

Huh, no, actually she knows he is not a valuable hostage, that he is actually worthless, the point is made explicitely in the books:

1. There is nobody against which he could ever be exchanged. She asked.
   
2. He would never be exchanged, with Robb's court political dynamics being what they were (the Kastarks are not the only ones who made it clear they wouldn't suffer him being alive, much less free)
   
3. He is not a safeguard against anything nasty happening to Robb, Sansa or Arya. It's all too clear Arya is considered dead, yet is Jaime even threatened? It is perceivable for a character, and it is fact for readers: Tywin had abandoned Jaime, we got that in his exchange with Tyrion. He wasn't proof against anything.

So... what's the worth of an hostage who's considered already dead for those who should care, and that nobody can officially use in any other way than keeping him in a cell? Nothing.

Two of your points are one: they say Jaime would never be exchanged. But things change, and exchanges obviously don't have to be 1 for 1.

I disagree with your other point. In fact, freeing Jaime was one of two crucial acts necessary to allow the RW to go forward. Of course, Robb had to blunder stupidly to piss off the Freys; but Jaime is the only one of his children Tywin really cares about, and having him out of the power of the North was essential before he could pull the trigger on the plot.

If it hadn't been the RW it would have been some other underhanded plot Tywin couldn't pursue with Jaime's life at risk.

Jaime was, in fact, released before the RW proceeded - and it proceeded promptly after he was free. That's not proof, but it's at least consistent and logical. Your argument that Jaime was not a safeguard for Robb or Sansa has neither evidence nor logic. Obviously he can't affect the treatment of Arya, as nobody knows where she is; so your only argument, which is that he wasn't threatened w/r/t Arya, is wholly straw. But for the Starks (and possibly their supporters) who were in Lannister control, Jaime ensures decent treatment ... and prevents outrageous events like the RW. Or would have, had he been retained in custody.

Her gamble was really an elegant way to break the useless stalemate of Robb's court politics: She does what Robb cannot without alienating people, she takes the blame, and Robb reaps the benefits without losing anything. Of course Robb and Edmure screwed that plan over early, by respectively:

1. 
   
2. Publicly forgiving her, even in a way condoning her act, in his eagerness to get forgiven by her for screwing Jeyne Westerling and the Freys. This was moronic, and lost him the Kastarks and sympathisers. It destroyed the raison d'être of the plan, which was to distance him from the splash.
   
3. Publicly pursuing Jaime, making Jaime's escapade not a fait accompli exchange, but a mere escape, which allows Tyrion to just not give anything to the Starks: if it's not an exchange, then there's nothing to exchange against what runs to you.
   

And of course, in retrospect this was not a mistake at all, since it's the only move which had a positive, outlasting effect, in allowing Brienne to continue the search, in binding Jaime in another oath which he feels a bit beholden to, and in actually changing Jaime's opinion a bit on his goals in life, by making him meet Brienne. Robb would have been screwed either way, since Kastarks don't matter much in regard to:

1. 
   
2. Losing the Freys -who are critical to his strategy anyway and end up betraying and killing him-
   
3. Losing Winterfell, and by the same occasion dignity, standing, and the war, having to now contend with a pincer attack without a home base but with much less supportive bannermen on the "king in the north" stuff (what's a king with a kingdom invaded and his capital in flames?)
   
4. The most grievous of all: having Stannis be crushed and a Tyrell/Lannister alliance forming. This means all the south against him, when he had trouble with just the Lannisters, when said Lannister were themselves held on multiple fronts.
   

Well, it certainly did break out Robb's court politics!

Elegant, not so much: treason isn't really elegant, and though Robb didn't want to accuse her of treason, Karstark had the right of it. And she released him without any of the usual guarantees and assurances that would attend a formal hostage exchange, thereby nearly assuring the net result - no returned hostages, and an ongoing effort by Brienne to complete the exchange, which Cat herself reneges on while threatening the life of Brienne and her companions. Rather a far cry from an elegant exchange. As a warrant of destruction for the North, maybe it was "elegant".

I agree that Robb was anxious to forgive her as a way to forgive himself. But two HUGE wrongs not only fail to make a right, they permitted an even greater wrong - the flat-out evil of the RW.

Attacking Robb's errors and failings does not exonerate Cat. Releasing Jaime was a monstrous mistake.

ETA (rather than new post): To all those posters listing numerous stupid mistakes: hats off to GRRM for designing an epic driven by character both good and bad, and by so much human stupidity all around, especially by the most lovable and forgivable characters.

[KingSnow]

The really sad thing is that several individuals could have done things different to prevent the current troubles.

Rhaegar maybe shouldn't have run off with Lyanna and not told anyone what the hell he was up to (lyanna maybe shouldn't have run off with a married man)

Aerys maybe shouldn't have burned all those people alive and then demand Robert and Ned's heads.

Jon Arryn maybe shouldn't have told Robert to marry Cersei and given every villain in Kings Landing a job.

Cersei shouldn't have sleep with her brother, Jaime shouldn't have sleep with his sister.

Ned shouldn't have told Cersei that he was going to stop her.

Cat shouldn't have kidnapped Tyrion.

Joffrey shouldn't have killed Ned.

Renly and Stannis should have backed up Ned. Renly should have backed up his brother.

Robb should never have allowed himself to be called the king in the north.

And hell, if that young Hightower hadn't farted in front of Elia and Oberyn we wouldn't have been in this mess.

The current problems in the seven kingdoms are directly the result of collective bad decision making and bad luck.

But without any of that, the series wouldn't be so intriguing. It would just be some lords talking... that's it. The fact that the characters do stupid things makes that story more realistic. People do stupid things all the time.

[Salome the Persian Witch]

One of the stupid decisions I keep going back to is how after Robert is killed, Renly explicitly says what Ned would need to do to stay safe, and that he'd back him! He tells Ned they can grab Cersei's kids, he has some guards/swordsmen, etc. Because Ned didn't listen, Renly had to flee (being the catalyst for his own quest for the throne), Ned lost any power, and THEN he trusted Littlefinger! This is AFTER telling a woman who is the daughter of a vicious, pragmatic, rich, vengeful power-hungry man from a prominent family he's going to "out" her???? WTF?

I'm always surprised that people dog on Catelyn, but this incident is rarely discussed, and I think it's ridiculously stupid! (In fact, my dad who's a historian and political strategist told me "Eddard deserved to get his head chopped off because he was so damn stupid"!) :laugh:

And hell, if that young Hightower hadn't farted in front of Elia and Oberyn we wouldn't have been in this mess.

HILARIOUS!!!!! :lmao:

[Manakhkubar]

If it hadn't been the RW it would have been some other underhanded plot Tywin couldn't pursue with Jaime's life at risk.

Actually, at least Tyrion suspects that Tywin had given up on Jaime basically because of the very point EB pointed out. And Tywin was preparing the RW long before Jaime was released, which was by no means predictable by Tywin.

[TrackerNeil]

In fairness to Robb, it wasn't his idea and he was pretty much forced into it by his lords. Had he declined he probably would have lost all of their respect. A lot of them seemed pretty adamant about not bending knee to a Southern king any more.

True, but then Robb should never have put himself in a position where he'd be unable to back away. I have learned from doing stand-up that you never, ever throw a question a bunch of people unless you are prepared for any possible answer. Robb meets with the northern lords and their riverlands counterparts and basically just says, "What do we do?" That's asking for trouble, and Robb receives trouble

Contrast that with the small council in King's Landing, headed by Tywin Lannister. When the question of what to do about the Vale arises, it's clear that Tywin has already arrived at a solution, and all that happens at the meeting is that the other lords are led to believe they helped in some way. Robb would have been smarter to do something like that, but then again he was young and vastly less experienced at political matters.

As to big mistakes, I'd say Joffrey's executing Ned Stark is in the top five. Had Ned been kept alive, Tywin could have traded him for Jaime and ended the fighting along the Trident long enough to deal with Renly and Stannis. I suspect that peace would have been short-lived, but it would have served the Lannisters far better than the war Robb gave them.

[TrackerNeil]

Also, we now know that Doran Martell is basically just biding his time anyways. I don't think he would have openly revolted against the Lannisters unless the whole of Westeros was with him at that point. He's shown to be a very patient and plotting man, and he's so close to having a Targaryen with an army back in Westeros.

Interesting. I'd read Doran's "biding his time" as "doing nothing." Sure, he has some fantasies about revenge against the Lannisters, but fantasies are really all they are. He never takes any concrete steps in that direction, which probably accounts for Oberyn's impatience. I'm all for moving cautiously, but a plan is supposed to have both A) a goal and B ) a means to accomplishing that goal. Doran's plan had A in spades but lacked B, which in my book makes it a daydream.

[Lone-Wolf]

One of the stupid decisions I keep going back to is how after Robert is killed, Renly explicitly says what Ned would need to do to stay safe, and that he'd back him! He tells Ned they can grab Cersei's kids, he has some guards/swordsmen, etc. Because Ned didn't listen, Renly had to flee (being the catalyst for his own quest for the throne), Ned lost any power, and THEN he trusted Littlefinger! This is AFTER telling a woman who is the daughter of a vicious, pragmatic, rich, vengeful power-hungry man from a prominent family he's going to "out" her???? WTF?

I was just going to post about this, having just gotten to this point in my re-read of AGOT. If Ned had gone with Renly's plan they could have stopped the war before it even began, Joffrey, Myrcella, and Tommen's true parentage would have been revealed, and Stannis could have inherited the throne peacefully.

Of course, Ned shouldn't have warned Cersei of his plans, either. But both poor decisions were in keeping with Ned's philosophy. He thought that since he always played by the rules, then everyone else did, too.

[Lady Blackfish]

Contrast that with the small council in King's Landing, headed by Tywin Lannister. When the question of what to do about the Vale arises, it's clear that Tywin has already arrived at a solution, and all that happens at the meeting is that the other lords are led to believe they helped in some way. Robb would have been smarter to do something like that, but then again he was young and vastly less experienced at political matters.

I think there's more to it than inexperience, it's also a matter of philosophy. The relationship between overlords and their underlings can perhaps vary, but it's clear that at least some people in Westeros see it as a contract of sorts, where the overlord owes their underlings certain things. For example, Edmure could have kept his bannermen close by at all times but he allowed them to go home and defend their lands. He himself says that he could't not let them go, so he is compelled by a sense of obligation toward his bannermen. I feel like the consultation of the bannermen in this scene is pretty in keeping with that sentiment. Robb doesn't merely want to make the bannermen feel enfranchised, he truly is interested in their opinions regarding the direction of this joint venture. It's a legitimate leadership style, and while it's obviously prone to specific exploitable vulnerabilities (ie Tywin counting on Edmure to weaken his central reserve because of said "gallantry") there are usually other advantages to be reaped. In that sense I don't think it's terrible that the north/Starks seems to have this tradition of consultation and moots and the like; democracy "evolved" for a reason. But in this one particular instance they got this totally left-field suggestion that blew everything out of the water. It's in keeping with what generally happens to the Starks: their goodness leaves them vulnerable and then bad luck comes by to finish off the job.

Tywin's autocratic style works for him in part because his bannermen don't expect more. At this stage in the game Robb's bannermen might have balked if he didn't do what his father would've done and listened to one and all in their turn.

[TrackerNeil]

I think there's more to it than inexperience, it's also a matter of philosophy. The relationship between overlords and their underlings can perhaps vary, but it's clear that at least some people in Westeros see it as a contract of sorts, where the overlord owes their underlings certain things. For example, Edmure could have kept his bannermen close by at all times but he allowed them to go home and defend their lands. He himself says that he could't not let them go, so he is compelled by a sense of obligation toward his bannermen. I feel like the consultation of the bannermen in this scene is pretty in keeping with that sentiment. Robb doesn't merely want to make the bannermen feel enfranchised, he truly is interested in their opinions regarding the direction of this joint venture. It's a legitimate leadership style, and while it's obviously prone to specific exploitable vulnerabilities (ie Tywin counting on Edmure to weaken his central reserve because of said "gallantry") there are usually other advantages to be reaped. In that sense I don't think it's terrible that the north/Starks seems to have this tradition of consultation and moots and the like; democracy "evolved" for a reason. But in this one particular instance they got this totally left-field suggestion that blew everything out of the water. It's in keeping with what generally happens to the Starks: their goodness leaves them vulnerable and then bad luck comes by to finish off the job.

Tywin's autocratic style works for him in part because his bannermen don't expect more. At this stage in the game Robb's bannermen might have balked if he didn't do what his father would've done and listened to one and all in their turn.

Tywin did listen to each of his councillors; he just didn't really give them decision-making power. That ensured that no one threw him a curve.

Otherwise, you seem to be saying that Robb's "goodness" is what prompted him to make a mistake. Fine. When someone makes a mistake out of goodness, the goodness remains good and the mistake remains a mistake. Robb let his bannermen give him the bum's rush, which worked out very badly for him. That's a political mistake regardless of the motivation.