Game of Thrones Thread

[number51]

The war doesn't just involve two people. There are hostilities from multiple people involved. The Dothraki want plunder so there is no reason for them to end their desire for plunder simply because Dany is dead.

Wow, you are still going on about what would have happen to the Dothraki if Daney had died.

1. She didn't.
2. If, hypothetically she had died and the war ended, the Dothraki would go to Dorne and pillage and rape, I already told you that.

The real question is how many more pillage and rape free battles will the Dothraki go along with before they return to form, even with Daney around?

 

[nc0gnet0]

I never watched the inside look so there would be nothing to watch again as this is the first time I'm seeing this. I was referring to where in the show does it say it was his plan. Not discounting that the writers said it but simply saying that was not what I was referring to when I asked the question.

I will rewatch the War Room scene this weekend.

I meant you need to re-watch the episode with Cersei and Jamie in the war room (or is it the map room?). It was pretty obvious who was the strategist. Now, Cersei is playing a big role too, but not in so much as the battle field planning, rather gathering allies, getting funding, etc.

This is why I posted the What happens to Cersei if Jamie leaves? She has no commander of her forces.

 

[Tjodalv]

Are you saying King of the North is an office more akin to Holy Roman Emperor, in that the HRE was always a king, but the kingdom which the individual ruled didn't matter as long as it was part of the Empire? I guess the analogy would be houses = kingdoms in this case. The problem with that is -- as far as I know -- the KotN has always been a position held by the eldest male Stark unless he abdicated.

 

[Warrior Spirit]

I meant you need to re-watch the episode with Cersei and Jamie in the war room (or is it the map room?). It was pretty obvious who was the strategist. Now, Cersei is playing a big role too, but not in so much as the battle field planning, rather gathering allies, getting funding, etc.

This is why I posted the What happens to Cersei if Jamie leaves? She has no commander of her forces.

No good leader, no good army. Funny how true the Fat King's words from season 1 ring now.

"I do know this: If the Targaryen girl convinces her horselord husband to invade and the Dothraki horde crosses the Narrow Sea . . . we won't be able to stop them," he says. "Let's say Viserys Targaryen lands with 40,000 Dothraki screamers at his back. We hole up in our castles. A wise move. Only a fool would meet the Dothraki in an open field."

"one army, a real army, united behind one leader with one purpose is stronger than five."

 

[nc0gnet0]

Are you saying King of the North is an office more akin to Holy Roman Emperor, in that the HRE was always a king, but the kingdom which the individual ruled didn't matter as long as it was part of the Empire? I guess the analogy would be houses = kingdoms in this case. The problem with that is -- as far as I know -- the KotN has always been a position held by the eldest male Stark unless he abdicated.

Well, the KotN, is a title that until Rob, hasn't been held by anyone for over 3,000 years. The title was Warden of the North, throughout the Targ dynasty. The last King in the North (priot to Rob) was Torrhen Stark, who bent the knee to House Targaryen during Aegon's Conquest, so it is a rather recent position, or at least has a huge gap. What I am saying is the recent iteration makes it appear to be an elected position, not one to be claimed by birth right. I could be wrong, there is a little wiggle room here.

 

[remydat]

Wow, you are still going on about what would have happen to the Dothraki if Daney had died.

1. She didn't.
2. If, hypothetically she had died and the war ended, the Dothraki would go to Dorne and pillage and rape, I already told you that.

The real question is how many more pillage and rape free battles will the Dothraki go along with before they return to form, even with Daney around?

Yes because you are still going on about a war being over just because Dany is dead.

1. Yes she didn't die which is part of the reason why Jamie charging her was Special person. He risked his life for something that had minimal chance of success.
2. Hypothetically if she had die, the war does not necessarily end. Your statement has several assumptions you pass off as fact. The war doesn't have to end with her death and the Dothraki don't have to travel hundreds if not thousands of miles to Dorne to go rape and pillage. Not to mention this assumes the Dothraki even know how to get to Dorne.

As to your question, I presume as long as she is the mother of dragons, they will be forced to behave somewhat.

 

[remydat]

I meant you need to re-watch the episode with Cersei and Jamie in the war room (or is it the map room?). It was pretty obvious who was the strategist. Now, Cersei is playing a big role too, but not in so much as the battle field planning, rather gathering allies, getting funding, etc.

This is why I posted the What happens to Cersei if Jamie leaves? She has no commander of her forces.

As I said, I'll watch the scene again when over the weekend but I viewed them as both sharing those duties with Jamie the field commander as well.

I am not disputing his being a strategist as you provided evidence for your opinion that was clear. Not to mention my comment about leaving it to Cersei was moreso me just talking shit about Jamie. I simply questioned you because I didn't recall a scene where it was explicit that Jamie planned the attack on Olenna.

 

[nc0gnet0]

Yes because you are still going on about a war being over just because Dany is dead.

1. Yes she didn't die which is part of the reason why Jamie charging her was Special person. He risked his life for something that had minimal chance of success.
2. Hypothetically if she had die, the war does not necessarily end. Your statement has several assumptions you pass off as fact. The war doesn't have to end with her death and the Dothraki don't have to travel hundreds if not thousands of miles to Dorne to go rape and pillage. Not to mention this assumes the Dothraki even know how to get to Dorne.

As to your question, I presume as long as she is the mother of dragons, they will be forced to behave somewhat.

With Dany not having any clear second in command, at least not one that you would think could still command the Dothraki, I think it would evolve more into a mass riot, than an actual war. Now, if someone like Jon comes in and Allies with Dany, and he commands the Dothraki respect, then I think the war would go on, but at this point I don't see that happening, but I don't think the Dothraki would just pack their bags and go home either.

Suffice it to say with out any clear leadership, the Dothraki would be a disorganized mob, and much easier to defeat, and much easier to rally all of Westeros to fight against, so in those terms, taking out Dany would make some sense.

 

[nc0gnet0]

As I said, I'll watch the scene again when over the weekend but I viewed them as both sharing those duties with Jamie the field commander as well.

I am not disputing his being a strategist as you provided evidence for your opinion that was clear. Not to mention my comment about leaving it to Cersei was moreso me just talking shit about Jamie. I simply questioned you because I didn't recall a scene where it was explicit that Jamie planned the attack on Olenna.

Fair enough, do you remember the scene in which he told Olenna he learned that trick from Rob (leaving a small force at CR, and diverting his forces to the Reach)?

[video=youtube_share;3Djtf-nyQto]https://youtu.be/3Djtf-nyQto[/video]

 

[remydat]

Are you saying King of the North is an office more akin to Holy Roman Emperor, in that the HRE was always a king, but the kingdom which the individual ruled didn't matter as long as it was part of the Empire? I guess the analogy would be houses = kingdoms in this case. The problem with that is -- as far as I know -- the KotN has always been a position held by the eldest male Stark unless he abdicated.

Well, the KotN, is a title that until Rob, hasn't been held by anyone for over 3,000 years. The title was Warden of the North, throughout the Targ dynasty. The last King in the North (priot to Rob) was Torrhen Stark, who bent the knee to House Targaryen during Aegon's Conquest, so it is a rather recent position, or at least has a huge gap. What I am saying is the recent iteration makes it appear to be an elected position, not one to be claimed by birth right. I could be wrong, there is a little wiggle room here.

The Starks were Kings of the North for thousands of years even before recorded history and the arrival of the Andals. Also Torrhen Stark last held the title 300 years before Robb not 3,000. So relatively speaking the Starks have been Kings of the North for far longer than they have been vassals to the Targaryens. And over those thousands of years, no other house has really laid claim to that title.

Of course, at any given time if another House is strong enough to subjugate all others then they can claim that title I suppose but by in large, that title is historically almost exclusively been the title of a Stark. In fact, the Starks as Kings of the North has a longer and more storied history than than Targaryen's as ruler of the 7 Kingdoms. That kind of history is hard to overturn hence why a lot of the Northerners would still likely look to a Stark which is why Sansa was so valuable a prize.

 

[remydat]

Fair enough, do you remember the scene in which he told Olenna he learned that trick from Rob (leaving a small force at WF, and diverting his forces to the Reach)?

[video=youtube_share;3Djtf-nyQto]https://youtu.be/3Djtf-nyQto[/video]

Ah yes, I do remember that now and that is what I was looking for as that would certainly confirm that it was his idea. Thank you.

 

[nc0gnet0]

Ah yes, I do remember that now and that is what I was looking for as that would certainly confirm that it was his idea. Thank you.

here is the scene I was also referring too:

[video=youtube_share;u2HbYdZZUes]https://youtu.be/u2HbYdZZUes[/video]

They are a team, but it is jamie, not Cersei, that is responsible for all the tactical planning, Cersei did recruit Euron, but I think it was Jamie (this is just speculation) that was responsible for recruiting Randayl, and while Cersei brought Euron to KL, it was Jamie who planned to have Euron ships destroy the unsullied transports, effectively isolating them miles away from the main conflict.

 

[remydat]

With Dany not having any clear second in command, at least not one that you would think could still command the Dothraki, I think it would evolve more into a mass riot, than an actual war. Now, if someone like Jon comes in and Allies with Dany, and he commands the Dothraki respect, then I think the war would go on, but at this point I don't see that happening, but I don't think the Dothraki would just pack their bags and go home either.

Suffice it to say with out any clear leadership, the Dothraki would be a disorganized mob, and much easier to defeat, and much easier to rally all of Westeros to fight against, so in those terms, taking out Dany would make some sense.

The Dothraki have been raping and pillaging for centuries. They don't need Dany to teach them how to do that and raping and pillaging are what one does in the aftermath of a war not a mass riot. We are not talking about a small group here but something like 100,000 Dothraki. That is not a mass riot. That is an army. I also don't think the Dothraki need a foreign leader in order to wage war.

I will concede, it would be easier to rally all of Westeros to fight against them with Dany dead but that would require Cersei facing them. As the quote Spartan posted above states, if she just stays holed up in her city while the Dothraki are rampaging across Westeross, no one is going to rally behind her to consider her a true Queen. You can't sit by and do nothing as 100k men rampage the country you allegedly rule and still be considered a ruler.

So what is she going to do? She faces them in open battle and she's fucked. She stays holed up in the city and when the dust settles she will find out, she is Queen of King's Landing and nothing else because there is no way all these other Kingdoms bend the knee to a Queen/King that stayed holed up in her castle. Even in the scene in the map room, Jamie says she is Queen of 3 Kingdoms at best and if she does nothing as the Dothraki rampage, she will lose all the other Kingdom's.

Having said that, as I said earlier, if you have a good shot of taking out Dany then by all means take it. However, risking your life when you are as important as you say (like you said, what is Cersei without Jamie to command) to try and kill Dany when it has like what a 5% chance of success is stupid.

 

[remydat]

here is the scene I was also referring too:

[video=youtube_share;u2HbYdZZUes]https://youtu.be/u2HbYdZZUes[/video]

They are a team, but it is jamie, not Cersei, that is responsible for all the tactical planning, Cersei did recruit Euron, but I think it was Jamie (this is just speculation) that was responsible for recruiting Randayl, and while Cersei brought Euron to KL, it was Jamie who planned to have Euron ships destroy the unsullied transports, effectively isolating them miles away from the main conflict.

Yeah I remember this but I view this moreso them go over strategy together with the Queen seeking counsel from an advisor. But in the end she says, "Think I listened to father for 40 year and learned nothing." So they are both strategists. But in any event your point about the specific strategy was proven with the Olenna video.

 

[nc0gnet0]

The Starks were Kings of the North for thousands of years even before recorded history and the arrival of the Andals. Also Torrhen Stark last held the title 300 years before Robb not 3,000. So relatively speaking the Starks have been Kings of the North for far longer than they have been vassals to the Targaryens. And over those thousands of years, no other house as really laid claim to that title.

Of course, at any given time if another House is strong enough to subjugate all others then they can claim that title I suppose but by in large, that title is historically almost exclusive been the title of a Stark.

Oops, my bad, I added a zero..........

I don't dispute your fact of the Starks holding the title for thousands of years, but, I am saying, this recent iteration appears to be a bit different. At any rate, its pure speculation, and you could argue it add infinitum, and no one would ever be proven right or wrong, thus why I offered it up as my opinion that the two titles could be held be two separate people.

 

[remydat]

Oops, my bad, I added a zero..........

I don't dispute your fact of the Starks holding the title for thousands of years, but, I am saying, this recent iteration appears to be a bit different. At any rate, its pure speculation, and you could argue it add infinitum, and no one would ever be proven right or wrong, thus why I offered it up as my opinion that the two titles could be held be two separate people.

I agree in theory it can. I'm saying it's doubtful that a Northern House would recognize another House other than Stark unless that House subjugated all other houses. My point being due to history, the Starks don't need to defeat everyone else to be crowned Kings of the North but I think any other House would have to defeat all others to claim that title through conquest.

Put another way, Snow won the Battle of the Bastards and people were willing to proclaim him King of the North. If Bolton had won and even if we pretend he was a good guy, I think he still would not be King of the North unless he then went on and conquered most if not all of the other Houses.

 

[nc0gnet0]

The Dothraki have been raping and pillaging for centuries. They don't need Dany to teach them how to do that and raping and pillaging are what one does in the aftermath of a war not a mass riot. We are not talking about a small group here but something like 100,000 Dothraki. That is not a mass riot. That is an army. I also don't think the Dothraki need a foreign leader in order to wage war.

I will concede, it would be easier to rally all of Westeros to fight against them with Dany dead but that would require Cersei facing them. As the quote Spartan posted above states, if she just stays holed up in her city while the Dothraki are rampaging across Westeross, no one is going to rally behind her to consider her a true Queen. You can't sit by and do nothing as 100k men rampage the country you allegedly rule and still be considered a ruler.

So what is she going to do? She faces them in open battle and she's fucked. She stays holed up in the city and when the dust settles she will find out, she is Queen of King's Landing and nothing else because there is no way all these other Kingdoms bend the knee to a Queen/King that stayed holed up in her castle. Even in the scene in the map room, Jamie says she is Queen of 3 Kingdoms at best and if she does nothing as the Dothraki rampage, she will lose all the other Kingdom's.

Having said that, as I said earlier, if you have a good shot of taking out Dany then by all means take it. However, risking your life when you are as important as you say (like you said, what is Cersei without Jamie to command) to try and kill Dany when it has like what a 5% chance of success is stupid.

I can't argue that, but in the moment, Jamie was certainly already facing death or capture anyways, so what did he have to loose? I guess he could have ran off, flee as Tyrion said, but it is still a risk and a good chance that one of the dothraki would have killed him in the process. If he doesn't try to flee, he is a best a POW, and still basically useless, so, I am sure that influenced his decision.

Without Dany, the real question is, not what happens to the Dothraki, but what happens to the Dragons? I mean if they fly off and leave westeros, no one can argue that facing a Dothraki army without dragons is still much better than facing one with them.

 

[Tjodalv]

Well, the KotN, is a title that until Rob, hasn't been held by anyone for over 3,000 years. The title was Warden of the North, throughout the Targ dynasty. The last King in the North (priot to Rob) was Torrhen Stark, who bent the knee to House Targaryen during Aegon's Conquest, so it is a rather recent position, or at least has a huge gap. What I am saying is the recent iteration makes it appear to be an elected position, not one to be claimed by birth right. I could be wrong, there is a little wiggle room here.

Remove one of those zeros from your time gap...

 

[remydat]

I can't argue that, but in the moment, Jamie was certainly already facing death or capture anyways, so what did he have to loose? I guess he could have ran off, flee as Tyrion said, but it is still a risk that one of the dothraki would not have killed him in the process. If he doesn't, he is a best a POW, and still basically useless, so, I am sure that influenced his decision.

Without Dany, the real question is, not what happens to the Dothraki, but what happens to the Dragons? I mena if they fly off and leave westeros, no one can argue that facing a Dothraki army without dragons is still much better than facing one with them.

Well he should have left when Bron told him too in the beginning. If you were making the pure strategic move then that was the right play as they had zero chance of winning period. He let his emotion get the best of him and then just compounded it by launching the desperate attack.

And I am not saying that without Dany, they would not be in a better position. I am saying, the risk wasn't worth the reward because the risk of failure was infinitely greater than the reward of actual success.

Let's say there is a 50% chance the war is over if Dany is killed. And let's say there is a 10% chance Jamie can kill her. That's still only a 5% chance of getting your desired outcome. Now let's say there is a 90% chance you fail and 50% chance Cersei is fucked without you. Well that's a 40% chance your decision fucks the war effort over.

Now these are just numbers I plucked out of the air but the point here is his chance of success was much lower than his chance of failure by a wide margin.

 

[nc0gnet0]

I agree in theory it can. I'm saying it's doubtful that a Northern House would recognize another House other than Stark unless that House subjugated all other houses. My point being due to history, the Starks don't need to defeat everyone else to be crowned Kings of the North but I think any other House would have to defeat all others to claim that title through conquest.

Put another way, Snow won the Battle of the Bastards and people were willing to proclaim him King of the North. If Bolton had won and even if we pretend he was a good guy, I think he still would not be King of the North unless he then went on and conquered most if not all of the other Houses.

If that were so clear cut though, and the Northern Houses were so loyal, why did Jon and Sansa have such a hard time rallying support to defeat the Boltons? I dunno, like i said, pure speculation on my part, and it's only a what if scenario that we will never see play out, at least not this season. If Brann wanted to claim WF (which he doesn't), would all the other houses then name him KotN? Or could the duties be split? That is what I have been getting at..........it's just discussion, can't prove it one way or the other.