Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Its difficult to know what would have been an appropriate thing - say sorry, give her some money and leave - its never going to make up for it.

Saying she was sorry, explaining how she did not choose that life and had no control over what happened, give some money and leave would have been the best thing to do. She was not responsible for anything that happened before, she was just gifted away to Drogo.
Now, she choose to take Drogo's side. After that, this defense made no sense anymore.

 welshhoppo wrote:
I think that many of the things that go wrong can be contributed to not listening to Catelyn Stark.

Ned going to King's landing? Should have listened to Catelyn.
Rob Stark dying? Should have listened to Catelyn
Bran getting tossed out of a window for espionage? Should have listened to Catelyn
Rob sending Theon on a mission to bring his father to the north? Should have listened to Catelyn. The list goes on and on.

Catelyn taking Tyrion Lannister for hostage while he was actually the most sympathetic of all the Lannister and was totally innocent of what she accused him of, starting a civil war that lead to the death of thousands and desolation in the land ? Should have listen to Catelyn… oh wait.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Its difficult to know what would have been an appropriate thing - say sorry, give her some money and leave - its never going to make up for it.

Saying she was sorry, explaining how she did not choose that life and had no control over what happened, give some money and leave would have been the best thing to do. She was not responsible for anything that happened before, she was just gifted away to Drogo.
Now, she choose to take Drogo's side. After that, this defense made no sense anymore.

 welshhoppo wrote:
I think that many of the things that go wrong can be contributed to not listening to Catelyn Stark.

Ned going to King's landing? Should have listened to Catelyn.
Rob Stark dying? Should have listened to Catelyn
Bran getting tossed out of a window for espionage? Should have listened to Catelyn
Rob sending Theon on a mission to bring his father to the north? Should have listened to Catelyn. The list goes on and on.

Catelyn taking Tyrion Lannister for hostage while he was actually the most sympathetic of all the Lannister and was totally innocent of what she accused him of, starting a civil war that lead to the death of thousands and desolation in the land ? Should have listen to Catelyn… oh wait.

Requesting Rob Stark to sue for peace with the south after the death of Ned? Should have listened to Catelyn.

Bringing Tyrion to the Vale, where he got out a free man and even gathered an army? Should have listen to Catelyn .


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, of course: setting Jaime free so he could be exchanged for Arya and Sansa? Should have listened to Catelyn!
No, really, that annoying woman got everything wrong and did everything wrong.

Who then went back to King's Landing and made sure that Sansa was not harmed any more by Jeoffery?

Plus can you imagine GoT without Tyrion? Catelyn all the way.

 welshhoppo wrote:
Who then went back to King's Landing and made sure that Sansa was not harmed any more by Jeoffery?

Woah, really? Then it was a brilliant idea. Or she could not have taken him as hostage, and he could have made sure Sansa was not harmed from the start .
Double wrongs does not make a right, it makes two wrongs.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:
Who then went back to King's Landing and made sure that Sansa was not harmed any more by Jeoffery?

Woah, really? Then it was a brilliant idea. Or she could not have taken him as hostage, and he could have made sure Sansa was not harmed from the start .
Double wrongs does not make a right, it makes two wrongs.

The whole situation could have been avoided, had Tyrion not created a scene in that roadside tavern

Created a scene? He did nothing noteworthy IIRC.

This is the game of thrones, everyone is at least wrong.


Back on topic though before we are kicked

None of them truly deserve the throne, maybe they could set up a Republic.

A republic, or a democracy? Those do not always go together .
Not going to happen with the feudal system currently in place.

Nah this is too grimdark for a democracy. It should be a simple highly corrupt republic with a president dictator.

None.

IMHO, the bunch of them are so focused with their squabbles and petty politics, none of them manage to see the real danger crawling near their borders.

My vote goes for the ones who'll conquer the kingdom if they continue this path, the white walkers.

Then the problem comes back: who would be the right dictator?

Vote Ramsay for President!

Ramsey Snow is a very cool - in a deeply sick way.

"This is turning into a lovely night " was pretty epic. He and his girlfriend would make great Dark Eldar

 TheDraconicLord wrote:
None.

IMHO, the bunch of them are so focused with their squabbles and petty politics, none of them manage to see the real danger crawling near their borders.

My vote goes for the ones who'll conquer the kingdom if they continue this path, the white walkers.

Stannis is the only one to look at the bigger picture to tackle the walkers. He is the king who still cared as Samwell Tarly later says.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Ramsey Snow is a very cool - in a deeply sick way.

"This is turning into a lovely night " was pretty epic. He and his girlfriend would make great Dark Eldar

I think that Ramsey is a bit too messed up to have any lasting relationships. I can see him naming one of his dogs after her soon.

 TheDraconicLord wrote:
None.

IMHO, the bunch of them are so focused with their squabbles and petty politics, none of them manage to see the real danger crawling near their borders.

My vote goes for the ones who'll conquer the kingdom if they continue this path, the white walkers.

Yeah, I can roll with that.

All hail the Not-Lich King

As GRRM described, Stannis is iron -- strong, but also brittle. Kings need to rule, and ruling effectively requires that you be flexible and don't see everything in the world as black and white. Robert was the 'steel' in that family, although he came with his own issues.

All the listed candidates seem obviously flawed in some way or another. Of course, all leaders are human beings, and human beings are flawed. However, I think you can make a case for how it could go quite badly for each of them. There hasn't been an obvious superstar candidate since Rhaegar was killed. If he only had some living offspring...

I think they should glue Ned Stark's head back on and let him have the throne, he's the only one I liked out of like everyone.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Created a scene? He did nothing noteworthy IIRC.

Basically, he noticed and made greeting to Catelyn, which in itself isn't noteworthy, but when you have a bloodthirsty wench out for revenge, it creates a scene

 Necros wrote:
I think they should glue Ned Stark's head back on and let him have the throne, he's the only one I liked out of like everyone.

He would be a terrible, terrible king. The King of the Iron Throne has to be ruthless and strong and with the Starks sticking to their own ideals so hard they would even die for them, they would make the most terrible leader, assassinated after 2 or 3 days.

 Sigvatr wrote:
The King of the Iron Throne has to be ruthless and strong and with the Starks sticking to their own ideals so hard they would even die for them, they would make the most terrible leader, assassinated after 2 or 3 days.

I see what you mean. He would need to be as strong and ruthless as , or he would be assassinated in two or three days.
Oh, wait, that does not make sense!
There is only need for the king to be strong and ruthless if there are actually other pretenders to the throne. Which only happens if there is not an obvious heir. Most of the time a weak and soft king works good enough.

That is why we really need Hodor as the king of Westeros .

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Necros wrote:
I think they should glue Ned Stark's head back on and let him have the throne, he's the only one I liked out of like everyone.

He would be a terrible, terrible king. The King of the Iron Throne has to be ruthless and strong and with the Starks sticking to their own ideals so hard they would even die for them, they would make the most terrible leader, assassinated after 2 or 3 days.

To be fair, we dont really know how Neds older brother would have been, had he not been toasted... So maybe it's not so much a Stark trait as it was Ned and his direct line itself?

I think Kevan Lannister would've made quite a good king, personally.

Personally, I want King Hodor.

But seriously, at this point I don't think any of them deserve to rule. They have shown themselves to be utterly arrogant and self-obsessed.

Jon Snow. Or a ressurected Robb Stark. Man that would be a twist. Robb is still alive O.o

Just kidding. Jon Snow all the way.

Not Daenerys since she has her position partly because she's magic (fire proof) which plays into the LotR/Aragorn style fantasy idea that monarchs are in the position that they are because they're 'better' than ordinary people and it's my understanding that to some extent GoT tries to avoid those clichéd fantasy tropes.

I think a character that has been removed from the story but is not definitely dead will be crucial....

GRRM plays wild cards.

Gentry as King

 Jihadin wrote:
GRRM plays wild cards.

Gentry as King

I assume you mean Gendry?

 Hlaine Larkin mk2 wrote:


I assume you mean Gendry?

Spoiler:

And books-wise he's dead, Melisandre sacrificed him due to who his daddy was

yeah.. that's true, until it's not true any more

None of them. I really want the monarchs to be overthrown by a revolt and a constitutional monarchy set up.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
None of them. I really want the monarchs to be overthrown by a revolt and a constitutional monarchy set up.

What about an Anarcho-syndicalist commune?