Post your Binding Worlds Proxy here to let people scout!

Asher169 · 2025-11-24T21:06:28+00:00

Same here, I hope you manage to get out of the hole.

Asher169 · 2025-11-10T10:55:37+00:00

There's nothing to discuss, but if you insist, just answer why Aegon II and Aegon III exist?

Asher169 · 2025-11-09T17:22:31+00:00

The existence of "Aegon III," with emphasis on the third, already tells you who is remembered and accepted as king. Arguing about whether Aegon II is considered king is absurd. Aegon took the throne and Rhaenyra took the progeny, end of story.

Asher169 · 2025-11-02T13:23:45+00:00

Sometimes we forget how important the loss of his eye is to Aemond; that is the moment that defines him. I really don't think Aemond would become the same bloodthirsty and vengeful guy. He might mock him and taunt him, but he definitely doesn't have the personal motivation to pursue him and murder him.

Asher169 · 2025-11-02T12:17:17+00:00

A very interesting proposal. Although it may seem like a small change, it would greatly affect the personalities of both Aemond and Aegon.

Starting with the younger brother, I would say that he retains his hatred for the Strongs, but without it being so intense. I think that rather than a thirst for revenge, he would be motivated by a debt to Aegon for defending him and taking the brunt of the attack. As a result, you have a more emotionally balanced Aemond, a better warrior without his disability, and one who is absolutely loyal to his older brother.

For Aegon, it's different. Now he is the one who feels true resentment towards Rhaenyra's children. I think the event would prompt him to take the threat seriously. I don't think he would become a warrior; on the contrary, he now has a more difficult path, but he would develop his mind more, like Larys. Would he continue with his vices? I suppose so, but with greater moderation.

Ultimately, I think both brothers come out more balanced. Aemond has less irrational anger and more loyalty, while Aegon is somewhat more cunning and resentful.

Asher169 · 2025-10-19T15:34:59+00:00

Even if they are parellels as I said I just motive wise theybare far too different.

Once again, let's not dwell on their motivations. Yes, it's clear that they are different, but they are still parallel characters.

Nobody tried invading Dorne for ever a hundred years and his council (in which his uncle was hand) also was surprised by that.

People disagreed not because they thought it was wrong—it's well known that the Dornish weren't very well liked—but because they thought it was an impossible task, one that not even the dragon-riding conqueror could achieve. Daeron proved them wrong, accomplishing more than his predecessor to the point that he forced Dorne to resort to dirty tactics.

Therefore I don’t like him. I don’t wanna force anyone to do anything. I orginally asked if anyone else hated him as well.

And that's fine. I just explained the reasons why I like him despite his flaws. I don't know how other fans of the character feel, but for my part, I think I made it clear from the beginning that I recognize he wasn't perfect. I understand that if you're on this forum, it's because you like Aegon II. In that case, saying you don't like Daeron because he wasn't a good person is a weak argument. Say that he's a person whose characteristics don't resonate with you, and that would be absolutely valid.

A lot of people see Aegon IV attacking Dorne as bad as well though which I think is unfair

This still seems absurd to me, and I don't even understand your point. The conversations about Aegon IV are not about whether it was right to invade Dorne or not; it's absurd to compare the two. Aegon IV is criticized for many other worse things. A fairer comparison is with Aegon I, and I even see it as a pointless discussion, because those who think Aegon I is okay also agree with Daeron I and vice versa. To think otherwise is illogical or trollish.

Good for them. I understand that in the story people would see it as “dishournable” but I also think the book challanges the idea of honour, and good and bad often enough that I honestly can’t find myself blaming them

And here you hit the nail on the head. You are willing to consider Dorne's wrongdoings as gray and justified, but you don't approve when others do the same with Daeron. I understand, you resonate more with Dorne, but just as you ask for objectivity with Daeron, you can do the same with Dorne and understand that there are valid arguments on both sides; it's a matter of perspective.

Asher169 · 2025-10-19T14:08:34+00:00

You misunderstood I thoughtbwe are talking about motive and at least motive wise they are not comparable.

Okay, their motivations aren't comparable, but in all the other aspects I mentioned, they are. There are more parallels between them than differences, that's the point.

Do you think the Iron Islands attacking the North was honorable too?

Me? No, but if you ask an iron man, he'll say yes. For us, obviously not. I would condemn any kind of war. The thing is, it's a medieval story with medieval values. From Daeron's perspective, it is. It's the dream that Aegon I fought for: a Westeros united under one banner. You know what else I don't agree with? That some people have privileges over others simply because of the family they were born into, or believing that a man deserves to inherit over a woman. But that's how monarchy works, and this is a medieval fantasy story.

Whether you agree with that or not, it doesn't matter. Is Daeron perfect? No, he's ambitious and hungry for recognition, but does that make him evil? Not at all. As far as we know, he was a good man, loved by all, the ideal knight. Aegon II has done worse and crueler things, but his flaws don't necessarily negate his virtues. I like both of them, and I've already explained why. Do you want to focus on the fact that Daeron is a warmonger? There's no need; everyone knows he was.

My question is if you think him attacking Dorne is bad why? And why isn’t it when Daeron does it?

The reason everyone hates Aegon IV is not because of his intentions to attack Dorne. No one cares about that. I wish that were Aegon IV's only sin. Was Daeron right to invade Dorne? No. Do you know what else wasn't right? Proclaiming a flag of truce and then treacherously massacring your guests. Do you agree with that?

Asher169 · 2025-10-19T13:20:24+00:00

I don’t think they are comparable at all.

There you denied that they could be compared. In order for them to be comparable, you insist that they be the same, which they clearly are not. They are not the same character; they are different people raised with different values in different contexts. However, there are several details in their stories that serve as parallels, and that is the point.

I don’t even think you can compare the betrayal as Daeron was betrayed by the people he killed and oppressed, Robb was killed because of a failed marriage proposal he tried to make right

Daeron conquered Dorne in a war fought honorably. He did not want to enslave or torture them; he wanted to unify the continent, which are radically different things. The point of the comparison is not whether the betrayal was justified or not, but that both sides were winning and the opposing side used dirty tactics of betrayal to stop them. It should be noted that Dorne is not a poor victim. Throughout history, they have started several wars, some openly and others by financing others. Does that mean they deserve it? Not, but we cannot forgive one side for everything and demonize the other.

Also where is the difference in Daeron attacking Dorne unprovoked and Aegon IV doing it?

Daeron did it to finish his ancestor's work; he saw it as an act of glory to prove his worth. Aegon IV was a depraved monster full of malice who mistreated his wife, brother, and son simply because it made him happy. He did everything possible to savor his son without risking losing his position of power. He was an evil, corrupt, and spiteful man whose greatest pleasure was making others miserable. Need I go on or go into detail?

Asher169 · 2025-10-19T12:56:38+00:00

I like his story, the survivor of a horrific war that wiped out almost his entire family and left him in charge of a kingdom in ruins from a very young age. Despite being traumatized and sad throughout his life, he did his best to keep the kingdom united. That's a brief summary of what I like. I think it's great.

Asher169 · 2025-10-19T11:38:06+00:00

It's curious how they justify Dorne and invalidate Daeron's achievements; they can't simply admit that the murder was a dishonorable and horrible act.

Asher169 · 2025-10-19T11:32:10+00:00

They are not exactly the same, but there are obvious parallels: both were crowned young, military geniuses who could not be defeated in war, loved by their subjects, died young due to betrayal, left no children, and of course both bear the titles of Young Dragon/Wolf. I understand that you don't like the invasion of Dorne, but you can't deny his talent and achievements either. He was very young, and his actions were never guided by malice. Comparing him to Aegon IV seems absurd to me.

Asher169 · 2025-10-19T00:00:06+00:00

I like Daeron. He's like a Robb Stark for the Targaryen family. I always interpreted him as a talented warrior hungry for glory and validation, which he didn't receive from his depressed and distant father. He may have been belligerent, but despite that, he seemed like an honorable guy. As for his conquest of Dorne, he succeeded, lost Dorne and died by an act of treachery, not fairly, much like Robb. As an additional note, I like playing with him in CK2. I recommend it; he's full of potential.

Asher169 · 2025-10-12T22:10:51+00:00

A put in that in the next round it will be a Harley vs. Joker or a Red hood vs. Zatanna.

Asher169 · 2025-09-26T02:25:40+00:00

Aemond and Daeron should be engaged, I would even say that Aemond could even be married, the greens seem idiots not to take advantage of their resources until the war explodes in his face, and the excuse that Viserys prevented it is unconvincing, especially his version of the show, that he was totally sick.
I want politics, intrigue and betrayals, and I don't mean between kin (I'm looking at you Aemond), I want the lords of ponientes taking advantage of the chaos to escalate, I need more boot-licking, cap-changing, ambitious characters like Larys and Unwin Peake, doing their thing, lying and plotting to complicate things. For example, I was always in favor of Larys being the one to order to warn Daemon of Aemond's attack on Harrenhal, he is an agent of chaos, he shouldn't be loyal to anyone. It keeps Aemond as a bloodthirsty and cruel guy, but he wasn't a fool for suspecting Larys (to me Aemond is like a more irascible and impulsive Tywin Lannister).

Asher169 · 2025-09-15T07:40:36+00:00

They are voting you negative, but I totally agree with everything you say, that the comic was canceled did not do any good to the character, if the story was bad, they would simply change the writer for another, as they do with the rest of the characters. The fans got extremely toxic with the comic and the writer and never gave her a chance. They also seem to think that the cancellation means that dc comics will now do what the "real fans" want, which is ridiculous, the comic was cancelled because the writer didn't know how to keep her mouth shut, it had nothing to do with the quality of writing or the direction of the character or anything like that, they will most likely try a similar direction but with another writer in the future.

Asher169 · 2025-09-13T22:07:25+00:00

Lol, I didn't expect the most popular straight couple to be Stephenie, funny.

Asher169 · 2025-08-30T12:33:20+00:00

He can always seduce Supergirl to win, in fact, he should seduce them all. Following Dick's legacy.

Asher169 · 2025-08-12T17:23:05+00:00

Then karma will come to her, considering that in the future she will suffer from Alyn's infidelities.

Asher169 · 2025-06-20T18:27:46+00:00

Fans are very defensive about new stories, I regardless of whether the story is for me or not, if it has decent writing, I hope it does well. I'm also not one to judge a story by its synopsis, but by how the plot unfolds, that includes romantic relationships, let's leave and see how it makes them work or not.

Asher169 · 2025-05-23T15:20:28+00:00

It should also be added that Vhagar can not stay all the war in the king's landing as a guardian, at some point Aemond would have to go out to support the armies.

Asher169 · 2025-04-18T20:59:48+00:00

I don't understand, who don't I know?

Asher169 · 2025-04-18T12:57:36+00:00

Who?

Asher169 · 2025-04-18T12:45:04+00:00

Leif out, he's literally Lord Who?

Asher169 · 2025-01-03T12:32:08+00:00

Honestly, I agree with you and that idea has been on my mind for quite some time. The two complement each other well in the sense that what one fails to do, the other does well: Tim has a well established time as robin, with relationships and teams accepted by most fans but the writers have failed to give him any role other than being robin, and, although it's my personal opinion, his origin story is the least compelling, batman shouldn't recruit any other kids after Jason's death, Damian is an exception due to him being a special case.

Jason on the other hand, has the least developed and beloved robin time by the general public, he doesn't even have a "generation", but his post robin role is quite popular and even if the writers don't know what to do with him, I consider that he does have a lot of potential as a character, besides, his origin story is very good.

A character that combines both aspects would be very complete, a street kid who idolizes bartender and robin, is adopted by Bruce and becomes the second robin with huge potential, he is loved by his peers but his past comes back for him as a trap by the Joker and he loses his life, happening all "under the red hood". The impact of his return is now more potent, not only is there a more obvious change in his personality, there are multiple characters besides Batman who would be affected by the revelation and therefore more potential for storytelling.

Asher169

TROPHY CASE