why stannis pisses me off...

[mormont]

[mod] If people want to discuss this topic, they're welcome to do so - with respect and politeness all round.

If people want to bitch at each other, threaten to report each other, throw insults and toss around this '-stan' bullshit they will get the thread closed.

[/mod]

[E-Ro]

However, I would say that it is Stannis' intensive study of the monarchy, the multiple facets that he has uncovered about what the monarchy is and should be, that explains how a man once dismissed as "strong, yes, but brittle, the way iron gets. He'll break before he bends" has been able to adapt to changing circumstances that outfoxed Renly, Robb, Joffrey, Tywin, and Balon. To Stannis, he is the king because that is what the law demands and he cannot back down from that - but what it means to be king, how a king ought to behave and what he ought to fight for, that can and must change and Stannis more than any other monarch has a surplus of mental frameworks he can use.

And of all the qualities of a successful king of Westeros, nothing is more useful than the capacity for growth while in office.

Man I really love that essay, everyone should read it, imo.

[a free shadow]

Stannis got into the line of succetion through King Bob's warhammer.

Well, yes, he would not have managed it with his one sword. No one would have cared for him enough to help him :rolleyes:

The craftiest Tyrell viewed Renly as an empty suit. And Renly was portrayed as a 'yes' man on the small council.

All that is besides the point. The throne was either Joffrey's or Stannis', depending on what you believed. Renly doesn't factor into the equation, so he was knowingly a traitor twice-over, all for power. Stannis should not have bent his knee just for the sake of harmony. He could have, but it was not a compulsion. Stannis was not in the wrong, Renly was.

Olenna talks badly about every man, doesn't she? Renly was not portrayed as a "yes" man. And the point is the quirky use of the words "rightful king", especially in caps. As we have seen, the thrones goes to the one who takes up on himself to overturn the current king and manages it. As Stannis helped to do with the Targaryens.

[King of Winters]

I defeated your uncle Victarion and his Iron Fleet off Fair Isle, the first time your father crowned himself. I held Storm's End against the power of the Reach for a year, and took Dragonstone from the Targaryens. I smashed Mance Rayder at the Wall, though he had twenty times my numbers. Tell me, turncloak, what battles has the Bastard of Bolton ever won that I should fear him?

-Stannis.

How can you not like him after this epic speech?

[Rhymes with Weak]

-Stannis.

How can you not like him after this epic speech?

I forgot all about What-his-face getting run through with a demonic dagger after I began reading Stannis' epic speeches in ADWD.

[a free shadow]

Renly rebelled just because he could, without having an ounce of justification, legal or moral, for his action. He pretty much knew that himself when he ordered (indirectly) for his brother to be killed.

One argument, to put it short, was he feared for his life (vs Lannisters) and used the best bet to assemble the strongest forces, which would not have assembled for Stannis.

Also Aemon wasn't already a maester when he got the crown? So the ethical thing to do was to give it away.

I wonder what wil you say, when Jon's turn comes? :P

Anyway, I thought the thread just might manage to focus on the OP, but it does not seem so, so I will retire from circling the same arguments.

[JeepCSC]

What was Renly's point on killing a child? Did he stand against Robert's wishes on the one issue that was the most contentious we have seen in a small council meeting? Not a 'yes' man indeed.

Defending Renly is stupid. Stannis has several flaws. Opposing Renly was not only not one, it was one of his biggest pluses. Late Roman Empire is a very apt comparison to what Renly would have been opening up the kingdom to.

[devilrob6]

Believing that Renly had a right to rebel because of the strength of his army is one thing. But i don't see at all why Stannis should just have accepted that, which is what the OP seems to suggest.

I also don't see the comparison peopel make with Aemon. Aemon was asked to be king and he did not accept it because his duties were elsewhere (he was already sworn to the citadel). Stannis' situation is entirely different. Because someone can pass the right to the throne to a younger brother, doesn't mean that they have to do it.

ps. I wonder if Stannis or Renly had been given the Kevan/Pycelle-treatment by Varys, if one of them had taken King's Landing and turned out to be a competent ruler.

[SkaggCannibal]

what part of the law id burning people alive to try ensure he wins? Get yourself out of that one stanfans

When has he done that, could you give an example? There have only been burnings of people who were sentenced to death, who would've been so under any other Lord/King. It is debatable what the best method of execution is, but out of all the types of execution used (beheading, hanging, impaling, crucifying), burning isn't even the harshest.

[LordStoneheart]

Renly was selfish, but Stannis is too and in his case its worse. He can't admit it to himself. I've always hated that and I don't buy that he truly believes he has to do it because of right of succession. After all, he is a Baratheon, and they are all quite selfish.

[a free shadow]

What was Renly's point on killing a child? Did he stand against Robert's wishes on the one issue that was the most contentious we have seen in a small council meeting? Not a 'yes' man indeed.

Defending Renly is stupid. Stannis has several flaws. Opposing Renly was not only not one, it was one of his biggest pluses. Late Roman Empire is a very apt comparison to what Renly would have been opening up the kingdom to.

And I almost started to write an answer for the first part of your flawed argument. But your addition, while entertaining, reminded me that I am tired. You do what you do best :D

[Celestial]

One argument, to put it short, was he feared for his life (vs Lannisters) and used the best bet to assemble the strongest forces, which would not have assembled for Stannis.

"Fearing" is not being actually sentenced to death and have acquaintances murdered at the whim of a tyrant.

And he was under no compulsion to actually claim the throne. The Tyrells wanted to join the royal family. The only thing Renly had to do was negotiate a match between Stannis' heir (whoever might be) and a member of the main Tyrell branch. They would have jumped at the opportunity. The Stannis/Renly team would have been infinitely preferable to the trio Joffrey/Cersei/Tywin which they ended up joining in ASOS.

[TORMUNDSMEMBER10]

When has he done that, could you give an example? There have only been burnings of people who were sentenced to death, who would've been so under any other Lord/King. It is debatable what the best method of execution is, but out of all the types of execution used (beheading, hanging, impaling, crucifying), burning isn't even the harshest.

when he said edric storm had to be burned or killed or whatever? When he willingly let. Melisandre burn people of 'his kingdom' alive... Also executions is what you do to rapers and murderers, not your innocent nephews...

[The Great Walrus]

when he said edric storm had to be burned or killed or whatever? When he willingly let. Melisandre burn people of 'his kingdom' alive... Also executions is what you do to rapers and murderers, not your innocent nephews...

You seem to forget that Stannis never harmed Edric, he only considered sacrificing him.

[E-Ro]

Some of you don't seem to understand, whether stannis wants the throne or not is completely, and utterly IRRELEVANT to his decision to pursue it. His personal feelings on the matter do not count. He feels the throne is his(hes right) so hes trying to get it. He knows the others are coming, and if hes going to defend against them he will need support, getting the throne will help him get that support.

[devilrob6]

Renly was selfish, but Stannis is too and in his case its worse. He can't admit it to himself. I've always hated that and I don't buy that he truly believes he has to do it because of right of succession. After all, he is a Baratheon, and they are all quite selfish.

I'm sure that Stannis would not have gone after the throne if he had not been first in line. If Renly had been older Stannis would have supported him, like he supported Robert. But since Stannis is older he expects to get Renly's support.

[TORMUNDSMEMBER10]

You seem to forget that Stannis never harmed Edric, he only considered sacrificing him.

Never harmed him because davos saved his skin! He would of willingly watched him burn just like the mad king did to rickard stark. Anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves

[Stannis' shadow babies]

Question from an ignorant, just read once so far-reader (and Stannis fan): Do people base their argument of supposedly 'not wanting' to be king, despite acting like he wants it really bad, in that only conversation Stannis has with Davos? (never asked for this crown, not a matter of want, or something to that matter?) My memory probably fails me but, does he ever say "I don't want to be king" openly?

[TORMUNDSMEMBER10]

Some of you don't seem to understand, whether stannis wants the throne or not is completely, and utterly IRRELEVANT to his decision to pursue it. His personal feelings on the matter do not count. He feels the throne is his(hes right) so hes trying to get it. He knows the others are coming, and if hes going to defend against them he will need support, getting the throne will help him get that support.

he wanted the throne before he knew about the WW

[The Great Walrus]

Never harmed him because davos saved his skin! He would of willingly watched him burn just like the mad king did to rickard stark. Anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves

You clearly don't understand Stannis' character very well. Aerys enjoyed burning, he even was aroused by it. Stannis only uses it when he has to, and gets no enjoyment out of it.