Remove ads

A Sword Without a Hilt: A Song of Ice and Fire/D&D 3.5 Crossover

Reader mode
Family drama always hard on kids, hopefully things work out.

I have to say that even once Seven Kingdoms is taken a generation or so down the line there will be new factions, ambitious people, and still lots of political intrigue shit.
 
Crake said:
No one, unless Robert appointed someone. Warden is a title confirmed by the King, whereas Lordship of the Kingdom is determined by birth.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Warden of [insert direction] is a defense position. They're suppose to be in charge of protecting Westeros. The fact it's vacant with us around is bonkers, right? If we invade that side tomorrow who will call the banners and muster a response? Lord Paramount title is hereditary so that's Lysa till baby comes of age, maybe?
 
Angelazreal1 said:
Warden of [insert direction] is a defense position. They're suppose to be in charge of protecting Westeros. The fact it's vacant with us around is bonkers, right? If we invade that side tomorrow who will call the banners and muster a response? Lord Paramount title is hereditary so that's Lysa till baby comes of age, maybe?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Realm's paralyzed without Jon Arryn or a Hand. Robert doesn't do actual ruling.
 
Angelazreal1 said:
Is there anyway we could get one of our people made Warden?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This is why he's likely leaving it vacant.

Filling the position gives him the benefit of a clear hierarchy and a single carrot reward.

It also brings the consequences of balancing allegiances and a bunch of hungry donkeys who might go looking for carrots elsewhere and the one you gave a carrot to might not even be your man.

Even if he picks right he might lose more than he gains just through bruised pride.
 
All these talks about Bobby and the Seven Kingdom falling into ruin leap-by-leap is fun and all. But it sorta lack the gravitas without a first-person perspective of how fucked they are (Traitor).
 
Artemis1992 said:
@Crake Actually, Stannis is holding the biggest fortress in the east and is the King's brother. Warden of the East would come to him quite naturally, if our councillors push it the right way?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Small problem with that plan. He doesn't care terribly for Stannis the Mannis. Wouldn't even pay a ransom if I recall correctly. He'll give him obligations and duties but not honors or glory. But you're right it would be a great coup if we could swing it.
 
Angelazreal1 said:
Small problem with that plan. He doesn't care terribly for Stannis the Mannis. Wouldn't even pay a ransom if I recall correctly. He'll give him obligations and duties but not honors or glory. But you're right it would be a great coup if we could swing it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's not really an option?

Either someone is Warden of the X, with all the honor and responisiblity the title implies, or not.
And he doesn't need to like Stannis to see the need for someone reliable holding the East, not with an Evil Empire right east of him.
 
We should have it brought to the table, if nothing else.

Stannis isn't stupid, he wouldn't give up the goose ahead of time since it doesn't serve our interests.

And besides that, I bet Robert would do it just to have a reason to beg off making him his Hand while not insulting him--thinking about it, you know, he must be really kicking himself in the ass for deciding not to pay Stannis' ransom when we held him hostage a year ago.

Like really, the whole thing smacks of period drama in the future when they write plays about this era. So dramatic. If he had paid the ransom... well, I guess no one saw Stannis becoming Lord of Storm's End like he did ahead of time.

Man, that still is one of our greater feats, due to a good part of charisma, serendipity and basic empathy and human decency.
 
Artemis1992 said:
That's not really an option?

Either someone is Warden of the X, with all the honor and responisiblity the title implies, or not.
And he doesn't need to like Stannis to see the need for someone reliable holding the East, not with an Evil Empire right east of him.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm not saying he would actually try to divide the duties and responsibilities of the Warden position. I'm saying Robert may view it too much like doing his brother a favor and decide not to do it out of spite.
 
Crake said:
We should have it brought to the table, if nothing else.

Stannis isn't stupid, he wouldn't give up the goose ahead of time since it doesn't serve our interests.

And besides that, I bet Robert would do it just to have a reason to beg off making him his Hand while not insulting him--thinking about it, you know, he must be really kicking himself in the ass for deciding not to pay Stannis' ransom when we held him hostage a year ago.

Like really, the whole thing smacks of period drama in the future when they write plays about this era. So dramatic. If he had paid the ransom... well, I guess no one saw Stannis becoming Lord of Storm's End like he did ahead of time.

Man, that still is one of our greater feats, due to a good part of charisma, serendipity and basic empathy and human decency.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I'd really rather not put Stannis in that position.

We have zero need to have the Warden in our pocket outside of Stuntin' Fo History Yo.

Let the man live his life with the degree of honour he chooses, he's had to compromise and half-truth more than enough already.
 
The Wardens are a bit of an empty title, guys. Yeah, it technically gives you military supremacy of that geographic area, but that would have happened anyway due to the Wardens being Lord Paramounts. At the end of the day diplomancing individual Houses is still going to be more effective. There's really no need to go through the extra length just to have one of our people named Warden.
 
Duesal said:
The Wardens are a bit of an empty title, guys. Yeah, it technically gives you military supremacy of that geographic area, but that would have happened anyway due to the Wardens being Lord Paramounts. At the end of the day diplomancing individual Houses is still going to be more effective. There's really no need to go through the extra length just to have one of our people named Warden.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

But what we can do through Pycelle is get Cersei to support a Lannister loyal person into the position.

This serves our purposes even better than having our own man there, the sheer audacity of the insult will push people into our camp.
 
In Canon Robert gave the title to Jaimie anyway, we aren't putting forth much effort changing it to a less effectual and more insulting choice.

Surprisingly (only a little) that's the only time the Title strayed from whomever was Lord Arryn at the time.
 
Last edited:
Duesal said:
Ah, that glorified squatter.

I'd love to see his POV one day just to see how utterly paranoid he's had to have become from having to occupy our ancestral castle while we're conquering everything in sight.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I honestly see paranoia as the least of his worries (or furious reactions).

He's been asked to be the new political footstool that Stannis was, not even being granted the Lordship of the Keep that Stannis had been, but instead made the steward.

And, if the sheer insult of that is not enough, it was over lands where he is quite literally surrounded by our strongest supporters. He is as far away from help as you can be, and defenseless against the jeers of his peers.

If that's not the worst part, he's steward of a place tied to a huge propaganda campaign painting the Lannisters as liars, thieves and cheats, literally pillaging the legacy of Dragons out of their ancestral home. He is hated by everyone living on that island, and every speck of land for miles around. And the royal navy that was based out of Dragonstone beforehand, what had given the place its status and power, is too afraid to come sticking its nose out of Blackwater Bay.

If he is not murderously angry at the world, and given his implied character from canon... I would be baffled.
 
Feudalism is so wack yo. Wardens are in charge of defense, theoretically, but they're also always a Lord Paramount. So they call banners everyone shows up. If the position of warden is removed from a Lord Paramount then who do the lords owe ultimate allegiance to? King > Lord Paramount/Warden > Lord. Could a Warden countermand a LP and expect to be followed?
 
Angelazreal1 said:
Feudalism is so wack yo. Wardens are in charge of defense, theoretically, but they're also always a Lord Paramount. So they call banners everyone shows up. If the position of warden is removed from a Lord Paramount then who do the lords owe ultimate allegiance to? King > Lord Paramount/Warden > Lord. Could a Warden countermand a LP and expect to be followed?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Ultimate allegiance? The King, always.

The Warden is more a field title than anything, in peace time it gives you political clout in that it's representative of the trust put in you but you don't actually have control over anything more than usual because forces haven't been marshalled.

I guess maybe you could direct military infrastructure?

An LP would have to be quite stupid to try and countermand a Warden, discussion would occur at the peer level but outright conflict is just asking to lose a battle if not a war.
 
Traditionally, the title is appointed to a Lord of an age of majority who also happens to be a Lord Paramount, with the titles rarely straying from the Westerlands, the North, the Vale and the Reach otherwise.

Rarely, the title will be given to some favored lord who is high in the King's council or support, who he just happens to think better fits the role, and also thinking they can weather the anger of the Lords who's overlord is typically given that title.

As it happens, the Vale has never been stripped of the title, even by circumstance of the reigning Lord being under the age of majority. Because of this, but also because it was given to Jaime "I killed my own King" Lannister, who would doubly piss off the Lords of the Vale, it further encouraged them toward neutrality in the WoFK.

Anyway, the title is ceremonial in truth. It has the benefit of being a way to make it clear, "If you disobey my chosen overall-commander, not only do you gain his disfavor, with whatever resources and allies he holds, but you earn my personal displeasure, for he is the King's Warden of that Region."

If the King is respected/powerful/feared, people will obey the Warden. If he is not, they will not, and the title is window dressing.
 
Crake said:
Traditionally, the title is appointed to a Lord of an age of majority who also happens to be a Lord Paramount, with the titles rarely straying from the Westerlands, the North, the Vale and the Reach otherwise.

Rarely, the title will be given to some favored lord who is high in the King's council or support, who he just happens to think better fits the role, and also thinking they can weather the anger of the Lords who's overlord is typically given that title.

As it happens, the Vale has never been stripped of the title, even by circumstance of the reigning Lord being under the age of majority. Because of this, but also because it was given to Jaime "I killed my own King" Lannister, who would doubly piss off the Lords of the Vale, it further encouraged them toward neutrality in the WoFK.

Anyway, the title is ceremonial in truth. It has the benefit of being a way to make it clear, "If you disobey my chosen overall-commander, not only do you gain his disfavor, with whatever resources and allies he holds, but you earn my personal displeasure, for he is the King's Warden of that Region."

If the King is respected/powerful/feared, people will obey the Warden. If he is not, they will not, and the title is window dressing.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
So him picking a unpopular Warden is more useful to the Empire than one that's well respected but that we control.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top