Stannis bands the knee to Targaryens?

[Rhoynar]

Oh, then I'll just inform Edmure Tully that he's still Lord Paramount of the Riverlands. Rising in rebellion against your liege lord is one of the surest ways of forfeiting your claims. Every failed rebel has lost his lands, except the Greyjoys who were lucky it was Robert defeating them, not Tywin, Aerys, Joffrey, Stannis, Eddard or any other king or Hand who's been known not to have Robert's half-ass attitude towards rebels.

That's true. And I think this answers my question. But then, it's because they rebelled, not because they descend from a bastard. Once you have been legitimized, there's no way back.

[King.In.Yellow]

That's true. And I think this answers my question. But then, it's because they rebelled, not because they descend from a bastard. Once you have been legitimized, there's no way back.

They're still out of the line of succession. And besides, might makes right in the situation that Westeros is in right now.

[Tagganaro]

No, no he would never do that, that's why he's Stannis. He wouldn't bend the knee to Jon Snow either, even if he was fully legitimate R +L =J with supporting irrefutable birth documentation.

[Tibi088]

Then once again. The right of conquest is basically an absence of rights. Its mine because i was strong enough to take it. No law knows a right of conquest and its my guess that will never know. It would be like saying that if five thugs take your purse its rightfully theirs. That wont ever happen.

The Baratheons had no rights to the iron throne when they took it. By taking it by force they destroyed the legitimacy of the throne. This is partially to blame for the war of the five kings. Robert by taking the throne by force set an example wich encouraged Renly to do the same. If he succeded he would have been king by the right of conquest just as Robert. Robb being declared the king of the north is too an example. The legitimate targaryen sucession was broken and as the Greatjon said they bent the knee to the dragons not their new kings. What creates legitimacy is time. The Targaryens too had no right to conquer Westeros but the long line of Targaryen rulers and the many years created they legitimacy. If the Baratheons ruled Westeros for a hundred years there would be a lot less people that thought that they could take the throne from them. But on the time of the books its only the first Baratheon ruler who dies. They rule is new and thus can be questioned. Not to mention that there are still members of the old ruling family who still hope to get back they "rightfull" position.

Dont get me wrong i dont really care that much about the laws. I think Stannis would be a better King than any of the other candidates. But i think Stannis does care about then and thats why im arguing about them.

And when i started this topic i was more curious of what you think of Stannis personality. To me he seems like someone who strictly sticks to what he thinks is right. And i think that he would never use the right of conquest as an excuse to take the throne. If he thought that it didnt belong rightfully to him he wouldt take the throne even if he could. As long as he is confident in his claim he will fight to the death even alone. But might the appearance of the Targaryen claimants shake this confidence?

[JamesTruwood]

In almost any other circumstance it'd be arguable, but he choose Robert over Aerys. He will not choose Aegon or Dany over himself, for he helped to disposed to them and created the new line of kings.

[TalalOfDorne]

Never

[the bastard of starfall]

never stannis is king no other no bastard,exile, will usurp the true kings's throne