Robb's letter

[Erkan12]

I don't think that will is going to mean anything, ppl choose to ignore the will of the king of the seven kingdoms why would they obey the wishes of a dead rebel of one part of the kingdom? If Jon becomes king it would be as Dany's husband or being selected to rule after his identity comes out.

It's mean to every Northern House (except boltons), plus maybe some River Lords will accept that. Its the important point, Robb become king because of that lords and houses.

Think LF's situation, he has back up from IT, but he has big troubles about his lords....

[Dicer]

especially since there is clear indication that Jon would step dpwn once he finds out Rickon is alive.

Where is this clear indication? I don't think there is any way to know for sure how Jon will react in the future where he knows Rickon is alive but is still offered the chance to be KITN. Right now we don't know if Jon is dead or alive. And if he is temporarily dead, then how is he resurrected. And if he is resurrected, what will this Jon be like? GRRM has indicated that we would see a Jon with more shades of grey. Will he be disillusioned with the brothers of the NW and with concepts like honor and oaths? Would it be a harder, ruthless, more darker Jon?

I think we will see some rivalry between the Stark siblings as we near the end.

[Gannicus]

The will is sure to surface. Jon is sure to be legitimized in it, but with all the variables involved who knows if it will be important. If the show gives us any hint at all the will may not matter.

I'm not a believer in the GNC.

[Twinslayer]

Here are the problems I see with Robb's will:

1. Will anyone believe it is real? It's mixed up with Robb's fake orders.

2. Will anyone respect it? Both Robert Baratheon and Viserys I Targaryen had their wills disregarded after they died.

3. Will Jon think it is a legitimate way out of his NW vows? Maybe not.

4. If Jon dies and is resurrected, will that extinguish his claim to be King in the North? Rickard Stark's claim to Winterfell died when Rickard did. So did Ned's, so did Robb's. Why wouldn't Jon's claim die with him, too?

5. Renly told Ned that the person who controls the king controls the kingdom. Sansa realizes that the Lannisters, the Tyrells and Littlefinger are all after her claim. Harry the Heir might be after it too. Ramsay Snow is pressing a claim through "Arya." Manderly is angling to control the North through Rickon. The Blackfish may show up with a child he claims to belong to Robb. To take the throne, Jon might have to fight all of them.

So even if you think he would step aside for Rickon, you still have to ask whether Jon would step aside for Tyrion, LIttlefinger, the Blackfish, Wyman or one of these others?

[Old-Growth]

The wills of kings don't seem to count for much. Viserys I, and Roberts wills were both ignored.

However, legitimatizing Jon would probably be accepted. Kings can do that...

The will of Viserys I was contested, but not ignored. Many of the Lords and Knights that swore to support Rhaenyra did so.

[Old-Growth]

I don't think that will is going to mean anything, ppl choose to ignore the will of the king of the seven kingdoms why would they obey the wishes of a dead rebel of one part of the kingdom? If Jon becomes king it would be as Dany's husband or being selected to rule after his identity comes out.

The Northern Lords, except for the Boltons, would respect it. So will Stannis. At this point Cersei, and Aegon, are both in no position to do anything whatever about that. White Harbor will be closed to them and trying to move North overland in the ice and snow is a non-starter.

[Pikachu101]

especially since there is clear indication that Jon would step dpwn once he finds out Rickon is alive. But with Rickon alive, and Robb's will, Jon makes the most logical sense of being King Regent/

Why is it logical for Jon to be regent and not Blackfish?

A) as far as he's concerned Cat doesn't trust Jon

B ) he's respected in the North, Riverlands and Vale

C) I'm pretty sure he'd see it as his duty to help his niece's son

The Northerners will see child vs experienced commander supported by late King's will. And I expect Jon to rule North until Rickon comes of age.

Robb's will is going to ignored, Jon can't vouch on its support when Rickon has the Tully's behind him.

Really? I don't, IMO the Blackfish is probably going to be acting as regent. He won't let the bastard Catelyn never trusted do it, especially when bastards aren't trustworthy.

One thing we agree upon, Jon doesn't want to be the King, but he will have to take the position and rally North and wildlings to fight the Others.

Why does he have to be a king to rally the North and wildlings?

First of all it doesn't make a difference to the wildlings if he has a crown on his head or not and secondly Jon can't take Rickon's crown!

It doesn't matter what his intentions are, he can't declare himself king. It's just asking for future problems.

First, we don't know where Blackfish is. Most likely, he is somewhere in Riverlands, or Vale.

Actually I think he's the one with the will, and what he said to Jaime was about not trusting Jon was a divergence. He's on his way to the Wall to make Jon king because he's the only living Stark left.

I don't see how many lords who knew details of Robb's will, like Glovers and Mormonts would defy it. Wylla MAnderly showed us that Robb is respected in the North, and I doubt lords would ignore his will.

They'd defy it because they have a legitimate heir, Jon is no longer needed. Rickon would bring the North the Riverlands and Vale, Jon can't. It's only logical to crown the king who gives you more land and support.

Rickon won't be disinherited, and Jon won't challenge Rickon for WF. Just the need of fighting the Others would make Jon better choice for the time being as the King. It would be immensly stupid of Northerners to put their faith into a child when Others are knocking at their doors.

Like I've said before: Jon can't be a temporary king.

A) it's going to cause serious long term problems

B ) what if Jon's sons decide the throne is theirs?

C) Jon doesn't need to be king to rally the North, he could stay as LC and do that.

D) it is extremely short sighted to ignore the problems King Jon would make

[Lissa Nymeros Martell]

Robert left a will when he died too.. "words on a parchment" it didn't do much good.

[valtolin]

However, Robb himself was breaking one of the oldest traditions in Westeros by naming Jon an heir: the Night's Watch vows are for life. He had to point to the incredibly shady dismissal of Ser Selmy from the King's Guard for precedent. And whenever you are going to what Cersei and Joffrey did as justification for one's behavior, you are going to a poisoned well.

He, and later Stannis, did so because they saw NO other options. However, the reader knows there are other options, and Jon (presuming he survives his stabbing), would be inviting all manner of disdain if he broke his oath to the Night's Watch if his siblings were still alive. Jon has witnessed his father execute one deserter from the Watch, and he himself executed Janos Slynt for being a poor participant in the Night's Watch.

I think this is an important point. We have the precedent of Aemon, that had the possibility of abandoning his vows as a maester to became king, and chose to leave the crown to his beloved little brother Aegon. I see this as foreshadowing of Jon keeping his NW oath and leaving Winterfell to Bran, Rickon, Sansa or Arya.

[Mladen]

Why is it logical for Jon to be regent and not Blackfish?

A) as far as he's concerned Cat doesn't trust Jon

B ) he's respected in the North, Riverlands and Vale

C) I'm pretty sure he'd see it as his duty to help his niece's son

Because, in the eyes of the Northerners, he is now legitimized by Robb's will. He is experienced commander, knows where the real danger is and is Stark, therefore will defend his siblings/cousins.

Robb's will is going to ignored, Jon can't vouch on its support when Rickon has the Tully's behind him.

Really? I don't, IMO the Blackfish is probably going to be acting as regent. He won't let the bastard Catelyn never trusted do it, especially when bastards aren't trustworthy.

Robb's will isn't going to be ignored, not after Lyanna Mormont's letter, Howland Reed's interference and of course half of Northern lords still believing in Robb's cause. Also, I find your conjecture that Blackfish will be Rickon's regent extremly unlikely, due to the fact Blackfish currently thinks Rickon is dead, are on separate locations, and Blackfish after all isn't Northerner.

Actually I think he's the one with the will, and what he said to Jaime was about not trusting Jon was a divergence. He's on his way to the Wall to make Jon king because he's the only living Stark left.

No, there is no way Blackfish has a will. He left in Riverrun while the party moved to Twins, where Robb has written the letter and the will. The will was written due to news that came from KL about Sansa's wedding to Tyrion. Robb wrote the will and sent Mormont and Glover to Greywater's watch to Howland Reed. Blackfish had no influence in this, and wasn't even present when the will is written. As far as he knows, the will doesn't exist.

They'd defy it because they have a legitimate heir, Jon is no longer needed. Rickon would bring the North the Riverlands and Vale, Jon can't. It's only logical to crown the king who gives you more land and support.

After Robb legitimized Jon, he became legitimate heir.

Rickon can't bring the Vale or Riverlands, this is another conjencture that it is completely impossible to happen. Lords of North will abide to the will they know about. Manderly will give them Rickon. Uniting brothers, Jon will have a will on his side, but I believe he will step down immediately for Rickon, only to be named as King regent. Then, he will rally Northerners under Stark banner, wildlings and what's left of NW and fight the Others.

Like I've said before: Jon can't be a temporary king.

A) it's going to cause serious long term problems

B ) what if Jon's sons decide the throne is theirs?

C) Jon doesn't need to be king to rally the North, he could stay as LC and do that.

D) it is extremely short sighted to ignore the problems King Jon would make

Jon would be the best choice for Regency. And, plus there is a serious problems with your conclusions that seem to be based on some imaginative facts

A. What long term problem? He is Regent until Rickon comes of age, and then, on his own, returns to renewed NW. Everything we know about Jon is that he would never steal crown from his siblings, and that he is indeed man of NW, and that means life-time servitude.

B. He will not have sons. He would respect Rickon's right, and he will respect the oaths he has taken to NW

C. Actually no. Northern Lords will listen only to their King, no LC of NW ever gave them any command.

D. And it is immensly blind not to see what benefits would Rickon have from having Jon as Regent.

[Ser Pigeon Pie]

He, and later Stannis, did so because they saw NO other options. However, the reader knows there are other options, and Jon (presuming he survives his stabbing), would be inviting all manner of disdain if he broke his oath to the Night's Watch if his siblings were still alive. Jon has witnessed his father execute one deserter from the Watch, and he himself executed Janos Slynt for being a poor participant in the Night's Watch.

By technically being "dead", wouldn't that be able to undo the vows Jon once took? Plus the act of betrayal by his sworn brothers would give him just cause to break all ties and free him up for whatever fate GRRM has for him.

In saying that, I don't think Jon will fufill Robb's Will, not just yet anyway. I do believe in the R+L=J theory so I think he needs to go on his journey of self-discovery and find his true parentage, leaving him with the ultimatum of either taking up a throne as a Stark or a Targ.

[Pikachu101]

@Mladen I think we're arguing different issues. You don't think Jon would be king do you?

[Mladen]

@Mladen I think we're arguing different issues. You don't think Jon would be king do you?

I believe, Jon would be Rickon's Regent until he comes of age, when he will continue his service to renewed NW. I don't expect him to be the King at the end, no matter his parenatge, or anything else.

[cealicu_ca]

Why do people believe Jon will fight >against< the Others? :dunno:

[Ghost's Shadow]

Why do people believe Jon will fight >against< the Others? :dunno:

You ask the question the wrong way around.

[WinterWarrior]

I believed that the Will was critically important when reading the books. Then when the HBO series did not include it I began to wonder if it is a red herring. Why wasn't it included? In the HBO series Robb thought he was having a child....that was not in the book, Jeyne Westerling was unable to get pregnant because her witch of a mother fed her moon tea. I know the TV series is its own thing, but I would think that if the Will was that important to the Jon Snow arc that it would be included. The books seem to leave us with something going on in the Neck, the Will is there, Ned's bones are there, we are told Lady Stoneheart went there with the BWB.....but we don't see that in the show. So either the Will will make an appearance without having been introduced earlier or it is not that important to the Jon Snow story.

[Petyr Patter]

I believed that the Will was critically important when reading the books. Then when the HBO series did not include it I began to wonder if it is a red herring. Why wasn't it included? In the HBO series Robb thought he was having a child....that was not in the book, Jeyne Westerling was unable to get pregnant because her witch of a mother fed her moon tea. I know the TV series is its own thing, but I would think that if the Will was that important to the Jon Snow arc that it would be included. The books seem to leave us with something going on in the Neck, the Will is there, Ned's bones are there, we are told Lady Stoneheart went there with the BWB.....but we don't see that in the show. So either the Will will make an appearance without having been introduced earlier or it is not that important to the Jon Snow story.

In some ways, the will was already an important plot point. The plot of showing that Robb isn't going to assume he's immortal and leave Sansa (and the Lannister family) in direct line to inherit Winterfell. It also showed that Robb viewed Jon as a brother, never as a rival.

That being said, the will was obviously written with a lot of incomplete information. Bran and Rickon are still alive, and there is a lot of evidence that Jon isn't Ned's son, which Howland Reed (the guy the will was going to for keeping) knows. Actually, the latter bit might just be what spurs the truth of Jon's parentage to come out. Reed would not want the other Northern lords supporting Jon under false pretenses.

[Erkan12]

Robert left a will when he died too.. "words on a parchment" it didn't do much good.

Very different situation.

First, KL full of traitors, including his queen. So lannisters already scheming.

Second his will about 'regency', not his successor. It is not important for many of them since 3 or 4 years later Joff will become king already, why people risk themself for a regent.

Third, stormlands may follow the will but Renly declare himself.

Fourth, stannis may follow but he didn't knew. Jon arryn follow too if he would alive.

On the other hand, North remembers.

Manderlys, Reeds, Glovers, Cerwyns, Tallharts, Mormonts, Umbers are already scheming for 'unknown kid' Rickon. Do you think they would not give shit about that will ? (Even Karstarks may accept too, i think their hate for personally Robb not Starks) All these house would follow Jon, if that happens. I don't know about riverlands but north is reliable...

[Gannicus]

1. Will anyone believe it is real? It's mixed up with Robb's fake orders.

There are several powerful lords who know of its existence and legitimacy.

2. Will anyone respect it? Both Robert Baratheon and Viserys I Targaryen had their wills disregarded after they died.

Unless the North decides Rickon is the rightful ruler why would the Mormonts, Glovers, Umbers, Manderlys, ect not except it? They believe Jon is the son of Eddard Stark. It seems like most Northern Lords would be happy to see a Stark ruling back in Winterfell.

3. Will Jon think it is a legitimate way out of his NW vows? Maybe not.

Maybe not. But he considered Stannis' offer, and offer from his dead brother is surely more powerful.

4. If Jon dies and is resurrected, will that extinguish his claim to be King in the North? Rickard Stark's claim to Winterfell died when Rickard did. So did Ned's, so did Robb's. Why wouldn't Jon's claim die with him, too?

I don't know, but with all the fake deaths I doubt he's dead.

5. Renly told Ned that the person who controls the king controls the kingdom. Sansa realizes that the Lannisters, the Tyrells and Littlefinger are all after her claim. Harry the Heir might be after it too. Ramsay Snow is pressing a claim through "Arya." Manderly is angling to control the North through Rickon. The Blackfish may show up with a child he claims to belong to Robb. To take the throne, Jon might have to fight all of them.

Is Manderly looking to control the north? He seems quite ready to die for revenge. Because of the show and GRRM's comment I doubt there is a Robb baby. Also Jon might have a capable army(The Wildlings) who are equipped to handle winter.

[Pikachu101]

Actually I think the will could possibly be a red herring as well. I'm not sure what for but ASOIAF has a tendency to ignore wills, but the act itself causes the plot to continue :dunno: