thelittledragonthatcould Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 I don't advocate for stripping the Freys of the Twins. I push that when Walder showed up late, surrounded by the armies of the Arryns, Baratheons and Starks and Tullys, they should've taken a noose, slung it over a tree branch and grabbed Walder, while daring his paltry four thousand to draw their steel.Make it quick, and then pat Ser Stevron on the shoulder as he stares in horror, and say "Be quicker than he was". This is absolutely ridiculous. One of the primary reasons they went to war was because of the mad kings overreaction of a Lords crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dragon King Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Lord Walder still has blood/family ties with other Riverland houses that might feel honor bound to defend him in respect to those ties. Not to mention, the unavoidable conflict that might break out at the Twins following his death. It is illogical to start an entire new conflict after your region has been bloodied and you need to start resoldifying the peace over something stupid like a lord just being late. Tywin didn't just kill his vassals for being late, instead he only reacted after they attempted to actively rebel against his regime. Notice, how Tywin didn't march out against Dorne or the Vale just because they did not send troops in support of the Lannister cause while Hand. Simply, the main logic for the arguing that Walder Frey should have been hung comes from reader's knowledge about the Red Wedding. Why would someone rebel against their liege lord because Frey broke his oath? Yet again, the entire purpose of a vassal is to show up when called, disciplining someone who doesn't do their job isn't stupid. Tywin didnt march against the Vale of Dorne because he had bigger fish to fry. That you fail to comprehend this is beyond me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrambled Aegon Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Agree with TDK here. Walder was a useless fuck who wasn't doing his doing his job and should have been punished accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsc Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Why would someone rebel against their liege lord because Frey broke his oath? Yet again, the entire purpose of a vassal is to show up when called, disciplining someone who doesn't do their job isn't stupid. Tywin didnt march against the Vale of Dorne because he had bigger fish to fry. That you fail to comprehend this is beyond me. Because, having someone executed for being late is overkill and Hoster is already skating on thin ice because a number of his bannermen supported the Targaryens. Thus, it makes only sense not to attempt to instigate more conflict within his region when he is beginning the rebuilding process. Walder did show up, only he was too late thus Hoster cannot use that as excuse to execute him without causing pointless trouble for a miniscule point. Yes, Tywin didn't do that for the same reasons that Hoster likely didn't it does make sense to cause more conflict after a bloody civil war. That you continue to use faulty logic is beyond me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dragon King Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Because, having someone executed for being late is overkill and Hoster is already skating on thin ice because a number of his bannermen supported the Targaryens. Thus, it makes only sense not to attempt to instigate more conflict within his region when he is beginning the rebuilding process. Walder did show up, only he was too late thus Hoster cannot use that as excuse to execute him without causing pointless trouble for a miniscule point. Yes, Tywin didn't do that for the same reasons that Hoster likely didn't it does make sense to cause more conflict after a bloody civil war. That you continue to use faulty logic is beyond me. How is Hoster to blame because some of his vassals supported the Targs? They were upholding their oaths to their King, even though they're on the other side they deserve a certain amount of respect. Frey demonstrated that he has no loyalty. And if they executed Frey, who is going to mess with Hoster Tully with Baratheon/Stark/Arryn alliance at his back? If you think "being late" is a miscue I have a bridge to sell you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dragon King Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Agree with TDK here. Walder was a useless fuck who wasn't doing his doing his job and should have been punished accordingly. If they did throw a noose around Frey's neck would they still call him "The late Walder Frey"? :cool4: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsc Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 How is Hoster to blame because some of his vassals supported the Targs? They were upholding their oaths to their King, even though they're on the other side they deserve a certain amount of respect. Frey demonstrated that he has no loyalty. It means that his region has been extremely bloodied and there are already high tensions and likely some grudges against him, thus it makes no sense to instigate some more. Quite frankly, Walder Frey's actions are not all that different then the normal Stark response before the War of the Ninepenny Kings as how before they generally stayed neutral in conflicts in the South. Thus, I guess Bloodraven should have had Lord Stark executed for not supporting Daeron II during the Blackfyre Rebellion according to the standards that you guys are arguing. And if they executed Frey, who is going to mess with Hoster Tully with Baratheon/Stark/Arryn alliance at his back? Can Dorne really last against the combined might of the Lannisters, Tyrells, and Stormlands thus Tywin should have had Oberyn and Doran hung right after defeating Robb and Stannis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Dayne's Honor Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 If Gatehouse Ami ever got pregnant would they call her "The Late Lady Frey"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pepper Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 If Gatehouse Ami ever got pregnant would they call her "The Late Lady Frey"? Some would call her, "Hoster's Fault". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shearstone Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Weren't the twins built before the conquest? So the biggest betrayal was that a Stark King didn't see that bridge as a useful strategic resource if he ever wanted to expand the kingdom and take it for himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sansa_Stark Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Weren't the twins built before the conquest? So the biggest betrayal was that a Stark King didn't see that bridge as a useful strategic resource if he ever wanted to expand the kingdom and take it for himself. That's not really a betrayal though. And the twins are incredible difficult to take. 18000 northmen can't do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Why would someone rebel against their liege lord because Frey broke his oath? Walder never broke his oath, so the point is moot. I can well imagine that someone might rebel because they executed Walder when he hadn't done anything to deserve it. He may not have been personally popular, but he has marriage links to numerous important people (including Tywin Lannister) and he is a significant lord in his own right. If Hoster can just up and execute him without a really good reason, people will wonder, what's to stop him doing the same to me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shearstone Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 That's not really a betrayal though. And the twins are incredible difficult to take. 18000 northmen can't do it. Yeah suppose I meant stupidity rather than betrayal. The northerners should have taken the bridge before it was finished and then finished it themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erkan12 Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 And the twins are incredible difficult to take. 18000 northmen can't do it. Yes it is difficult but they could take it, even 10k is enough, (for that time being there was no enough time for it) Walder never broke his oath, so the point is moot.I can well imagine that someone might rebel because they executed Walder when he hadn't done anything to deserve it. He may not have been personally popular, but he has marriage links to numerous important people (including Tywin Lannister) and he is a significant lord in his own right. If Hoster can just up and execute him without a really good reason, people will wonder, what's to stop him doing the same to me? Yes but Hoster could take some of his lands and his castle from him. Execution is not necessary i agree about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ahura Mazda Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Weren't the twins built before the conquest? So the biggest betrayal was that a Stark King didn't see that bridge as a useful strategic resource if he ever wanted to expand the kingdom and take it for himself. Well, I would say that Starks are to be blamed more because they didn't reconstruct, repair nor men Moat Caylin than because they didn't take the Frey's Castle. Leaving Moat Caylin un-manned and ruined it's the dumbest thing one could do since at that time the South was a danger as well as the north.. ..And saying that "nobody ever passed through Moat Caylin in centuries" is no reason enough to avoid improving his defence capabilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.