Winter is Coming: House Stark Quest

Why you want to suck up Dorne so much? What did they do that makes us want to like them so badly? What's their use even? Or what, you think that Doran who didn't lift a finger to avenge his sister and niece and nephew will just day fuck it and throw their lot with us for killing a Mook they didn't like in a fight that had nothing to do with us? Why?
I'm not doing it so Dorne will like Robb more, I'm proposing it because I like the mental image of him being carted down like a footless turkey. I don't really give two shits about the politics or whatever in this, I'm just reading 'cause it's a Charcolt thing.
 
I would say that taking Casterly Rock, and a great number of places in the West, would be extremely easy at this point. There is no chance in hell that the West can put together an army capable of matching Robb´s with so little time, and taking many of its keeps would be as simple as issuing the classic siege ultimatum (surrender immediately or we will start beheading the hostages)
Devan is already assembling a 15-20k army. Casterly Rock has the funds for it. Plus the Lannisport guard is incredibly competent professional force. Casterly Rock is also a fucking nightmare to take and siege would leave us too open. Don't get cocky. I will
 
Okay so here are my ideas for the future.

We send Edmure and Catelyn to the Vale to drum up support for entering the war, this also keeps Edmure away from any army

Why would we want Edmure away from any army?

While he's rather inexperienced as a strategic commander, I will note that he is canonically the only commander to ever push Tywin's shit in on the tactical level, with a force about half of the Westerman's size. Tywin was losing to Edmure during the Battle of the Fords, before he pulled back to King's Landing.

Edmure's reputation as a poor strategist has very little to do with his being a bad commander, but more so to do with not seeing his enemy's broader political goals and his superior literally not telling his most important vassal his supposed plan. In terms of actual wartime command, he's... honestly pretty capable.
 
Why would we want Edmure away from any army?

While he's rather inexperienced as a strategic commander, I will note that he is canonically the only commander to ever push Tywin's shit in on the tactical level, with a force about half of the Westerman's size. Tywin was losing to Edmure during the Battle of the Fords, before he pulled back to King's Landing.

Edmure's reputation as a poor strategist has very little to do with his being a bad commander, but more so to do with not seeing his enemy's broader political goals and his superior literally not telling his most important vassal his supposed plan. In terms of actual wartime command, he's... honestly pretty capable.
Mmmm, never thought of it like that.
 
[x] You have won a great victory, and a single sellsword will not make a difference

Ahahaha. No way I am voting for letting what might be one of Tyrion plot go trough.
 
Devan is already assembling a 15-20k army. Casterly Rock has the funds for it
I don´t doubt they have the funds, but assemble another army after their main force has been crushed would take weeks, and that is being optimistic.

It is not a matter of funds, it is a matter of logistics, they have to recruit the men, arm them, get enough supplies...
 
Last edited:
At this point it might be worth trying diplomacy to see if we can't just negotiate a swap of hostages and if we feel we need more leverage we can start plundering the westerlands to occupy our army, this also lets us promise to stop if they give us what we want.
 
I don´t doubt they have the funds, but assemble another army after their main force has been crushed would take weeks, and that is being optimistic.

It is not a matter of funds, it is a matter of logistics, they have to recruit the men, arm them, get enough supplies...
And how long do you think it gonna take us to move from Riverrun to Casterly Rock with a huge army behind us? Long. Specially since we have to siege and take the Golden Tooth among other keeps in the way.
 
Get the vote out the way...

[X] Have this Bronn let go. He might just prove useful to you in the future.

A pragmatic man can be of use, just keep him away from the hostages. Limit temptation.

At this point it might be worth trying diplomacy to see if we can't just negotiate a swap of hostages and if we feel we need more leverage we can start plundering the westerlands to occupy our army, this also lets us promise to stop if they give us what we want.
Tywin's the biggest card in our hand, but we can't let him go. We've humiliated his entire male line and Grey Wind mutilated his golden boy. If he gets free he will not stop until he's razed the whole of the North and salted the ground to repay this insult. Diplomacy isn't going to win this at this point. Maybe, maybe when this is all over we can send Tywin to the Wall but I wouldn't put money on it.
 
No we don't. That's stupid. Like. Really? Kill our most valuable hostage for a revenge boner that won't solve anything?
It's a response thing, if they kill Ned Stark and we don't kill someone of equal importance, it's a sign that we'll continue to let the lannisters do what they want despite our hostages. Now, killing Tywin may not seem worth it, it's the only way we can strike back at them and not seem weak. the situation sucks because we know Joffrey's a cocky little shit that will kill Ned, so we gotta do something to be taken seriously, and Jaime and Tyrion are not even near the worth of Tywin in the eyes of most. I mean, we know Jaimes worth the most to Cersei, but Robb doesn't know that.
 
No we don't. That's stupid. Like. Really? Kill our most valuable hostage for a revenge boner that won't solve anything?
That's what hostages are for though. If they kill Ned, we are almost obliged to kill Tywin in turn. If only to tell the Lannisters that we are serious and that further executions will be met in kind.

Edit: As a deterrent I mean. Or else we will not be taken seriously and the Lannisters will continue to act with impunity and fear no consequence for their actions.
 
Last edited:
It's a response thing, if they kill Ned Stark and we don't kill someone of equal importance, it's a sign that we'll continue to let the lannisters do what they want despite our hostages. Now, killing Tywin may not seem worth it, it's the only way we can strike back at them and not seem weak. the situation sucks because we know Joffrey's a cocky little shit that will kill Ned, so we gotta do something to be taken seriously, and Jaime and Tyrion are not even near the worth of Tywin in the eyes of most. I mean, we know Jaimes worth the most to Cersei, but Robb doesn't know that.

That's what hostages are for though. If they kill Ned, we are almost obliged to kill Tywin in turn. If only to tell the Lannisters that we are serious and that further executions will be met in kind. As a deterrent I mean.
Yeah, that's why they killed Jaime in canon. Not like they have hostages in place or something besides Ned.
 
No we don't. That's stupid. Like. Really? Kill our most valuable hostage for a revenge boner that won't solve anything?
If we don't, the Northern lords will turn on us for being weak. Ned is the Lannister's most valuable hostage. If we don't kill Tuwin in response, Roose Bolton and other Northern lords will start plotting ate downfall.

And besides, we really do want Tywin dead. A living Tywin will always be plotting bloody revenge upon us for this humiliation. A dead Tywin can plot no more.
Yeah, that's why they killed Jaime in canon. Not like they have hostages in place or something besides Ned.
They can't do anything to Sansa or Arya because we still have Jamie and Tyrion. Jamie didn't die in canon because he was the Starks only hostage of note and killing him would make it impossible to even try and secure Sansa and Area's safety.
 
Last edited:
No we don't. That's stupid. Like. Really? Kill our most valuable hostage for a revenge boner that won't solve anything?

Hostages are only valuable if your opponent knows you're willing to kill them, and a big part of the whole system is tit for tat. If two sides have hostages, and one side kills a really important one then the other side has to respond by killing someone or several someones to even the scales. Not doing so tells the other side they can kill as many hostages as they want without repercussions.

There's also the fact that the Northern lords will pretty much demand it of Robb - canon Robb didn't have someone equal to Ned's worth as hostage, but here we've got Tywin.

Yeah, that's why they killed Jaime in canon. Not like they have hostages in place or something besides Ned.

Jaime's worth was not equal to Ned's, and he was the only real hostage of significant value they had in their possession. Killing him would have forfeited Sansa's life (and Arya's as far as they knew), so the restraint was at least understandable in that case. The situations aren't equal. Killing Tywin still leaves us Jaime, Tyrion, and two of Kevan's sons (with no angry Karstarks wanting to murder them, as far as we're aware, and Kevan's importance increased due to Tywin being captured).
 
If we don't, the Northern lords will turn on us for being weak. Ned is the Lannister's most valuable hostage. If we don't kill Tuwin in response, Roose Bolton and other Northern lords will start plotting ate downfall.

And besides, we really do want Tywin dead. A living Tywin will always be plotting bloody revenge upon us for this humiliation. A dead Tywin can plot no more.

They can't do anything to Sansa or Arya because we still have Jamie and Tyrion. Jamie didn't die in canon because he was the Starks only hostage of note and killing him would make it impossible to even try and secure Sansa and Area's safety.

Hostages are only valuable if your opponent knows you're willing to kill them, and a big part of the whole system is tit for tat. If two sides have hostages, and one side kills a really important one then the other side has to respond by killing someone or several someones to even the scales. Not doing so tells the other side they can kill as many hostages as they want without repercussions.

There's also the fact that the Northern lords will pretty much demand it of Robb - canon Robb didn't have someone equal to Ned's worth as hostage, but here we've got Tywin.

Jaime's worth was not equal to Ned's, and he was the only real hostage of significant value they had in their possession. Killing him would have forfeited Sansa's life (and Arya's as far as they knew), so the restraint was at least understandable in that case. The situations aren't equal. Killing Tywin still leaves us Jaime, Tyrion, and two of Kevan's sons (with no angry Karstarks wanting to murder them, as far as we're aware, and Kevan's importance increased due to Tywin being captured).
Tyrion is worthless as a hostage for Cersei, frankly she would rather have him dead. Jaime is the one with any worth, which means she can kill either Sansa or Arya, if she finds the latter. But sure, execute him and bet on Cersei/Joffrey not having a revenge boner. Then you can kill Jaime, and wait until they kill the remaining sister.
 
Yeah, that's why they killed Jaime in canon. Not like they have hostages in place or something besides Ned.
Tyrion is worthless as a hostage for Cersei, frankly she would rather have him dead. Jaime is the one with any worth, which means she can kill either Sansa or Arya, if she finds the latter. But sure, execute him and bet on Cersei/Joffrey not having a revenge boner.
If we don't there's no guarantee they will not execute them seeing as we would have then proven that we are not willing to execute hostages.

Not responding to Ned's execution just further encourages Joffrey and his mother to continue to act without fear of consequence.
 
Last edited:
Tyrion is worthless as a hostage for Cersei, frankly she would rather have him dead. Jaime is the one with any worth, which means she can kill either Sansa or Arya, if she finds the latter. But sure, execute him and bet on Cersei/Joffrey not having a revenge boner. Then you can kill Jaime, and wait until they kill the remaining sister.
We don't know IC that Cersei would be happy with us killing Tyrion.

Ooc, Cersei won't do anything that would risk her precious Jamie.
 
Tyrion is worthless as a hostage for Cersei, frankly she would rather have him dead. Jaime is the one with any worth, which means she can kill either Sansa or Arya, if she finds the latter. But sure, execute him and bet on Cersei/Joffrey not having a revenge boner. Then you can kill Jaime, and wait until they kill the remaining sister.
And what about Kevans two sons? Remember in this timeline he's retreated to Kings Landing with what remains of Tywins army, he became hand of the king in cannon and was shown as being competent enough for Varys to murder him directly. I don't think he would take his children or Tyrions lives being tossed aside very lightly
 
And what about Kevans two sons? Remember in this timeline he's retreated to Kings Landing with what remains of Tywins army, he became hand of the king in cannon and was shown as being competent enough for Varys to murder him directly. I don't think he would take his children or Tyrions lives being tossed aside very lightly
Yeah, because Cersei and Joffrey will care a lot about them.

We don't know IC that Cersei would be happy with us killing Tyrion.

Ooc, Cersei won't do anything that would risk her precious Jamie.
Ooh she would. She didn't lose her father and didn't have Tyrion to control her worst tendencies from the beginning. She wouldn't on purpose, but Cersei execution of stuff leaves a lot to be desired. Oh yeah, there's also the fact that Jaime was permanently maimed. Wonder what kind of things she can do to Sansa without killing her? Hmmm.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top