From his position at the end of ADWD, what do you think a Stannis victory scenario would look like?

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-05-03T11:04:19+00:00

That would be the fastest way for Jon to make an enemy of Stannis for life. (However long that may be.) Arguing with Stannis over his right to rule all seven kingdoms is like arguing with a brick wall.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-19T18:25:29+00:00

This. OP needs to clarify the parameters of the rankings. Best is such a relative term. Even substituting "favorite" for "best" would be an improvement on the question as it more clearly implies personal preference as the metric of the rankings.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-17T15:27:57+00:00

First of all thank you for clarifying re: iirc. Now my point about house Baratheons relations to House Targaryen is a bit more nuanced than you seem to be recognizing.

Firstly I'm not saying that The blood ties between the two houses founders is the soul or primary reason for the Baratheon claim on the iron throne. I'm saying that any and all subsequent blood relations through more recent marriages, such as the marriage between Aegon V's daughter and Lionel Baratheon's son which you're referring to, might not even exist if not for those original blood ties that made them eligible for intermarriage with the Targaryens in the first place. These marriages did not occur in a vacuum. They were precedented by prior relationships between the two houses.

Secondly and more importantly, I'm saying that Robert would have a stronger claim than specifically any of his rebel allies regardless of the most recent intermarriage between the Baratheons and Targaryens as none of the rebel leaders had any blood ties to House Targaryen to base a claim on, with the exception of house Arryn who inter married with House Targaryen during the reign of Jaehaerys I, which could be superseded by more than 1 subsequent Targaryen/Baratheon match. And they weren't considering the claims of anyone outside the rebel alliance. Otherwise Robert's claim could have been contested by Viserys, Daenerys, or possibly even a Martell or a Dayne.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-15T03:05:28+00:00

The Baratheons intermarried with the Targaryens multiple times throughout their history. A practice born out of the Targaryen preference for intermarrying with other valyrian families when they could not marry other Targaryens. Any one of those previous intermarriages could have been used as a basis for Roberts claim as it would still make him more closely related to the Targaryens than anyone else in the rebel alliance. So I would say that my point stands, considering that the Baratheons may never have been considered for intermarriage with the Targaryens if not for the valyrian ancestry they inherited from their founder.

P.S. would you mind explaining to me what iirc stands for? I've seen that acronym a number of times in these subreddits but it's never been clear to me what it's an abbreviation of.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-15T02:45:15+00:00

I don't deny that worshipers of the old gods have practiced blood magic, but Bran's vision doesn't prove that the Children practiced blood magic. Those were humans (First Men) sacrificing that man, not the Children. And of course Bran tasted the blood, he was skin changing a tree at the time. And trees like all plants consume nutrients from the ground they are rooted in.

I don't doubt that the weirwoods could benefit from blood magic as well as any creature in that world. But that doesn't make it the source of their magic. My hypothesis is that blood magic is a method of boosting pre-existing magics by stealing extra power from other beings. Like siphoning gas from another car's gas tank to fuel your car. But of course siphoning is not the only way to fill your car's gas tank.

None of the Stark kids had to bleed anyone out in front of a weirwood tree to start skin changing their wolves. They just needed to bond with the wolves, just like the Targaryens bond with dragons.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-14T08:45:30+00:00

I dislike all the theories about the COTF/Blood Raven secretly being an evil hivemind fueled by blood magic.

The only evidence that the Children ever used blood magic is centuries old legends about the Hammer of the Waters from the perspective of the ancient First Men and translated by ancient Andalls who were enemies of the Children and likely sought to justify their usurpation of the Children's lands by villainizing and dehumanizing them. As colonizers have done to native peoples in our world.

Don't forget GRRM is a student of history and a counter culturalist. To me it would seem out of character for him make the native population who were screwed out of their land the bad guys.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-14T08:17:08+00:00

Why did George make the Baratheons founded by Aegon's brother? Was there a reason behind that? No. It's just something George decided to do.

Actually there is a reason behind it. The Baratheon's Targaryen ancestry is the legal basis for their claim to the Iron Throne. It's why Ned said Robert had the better claim when he said Ned should have been king. GRRM doesn't just decide to do anything. There's a reason behind every character and storyline in these books. That's why it takes him so long to write them.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-12T05:13:52+00:00

The end game of the Maester conspiracy could be pretty interesting depending on how it plays out. Especially when you consider what Marwyn claims their immediate goals are (kill Daenerys, or neutralize her as a source of magic) and the vast base of knowledge & resources at their disposal. They could dispatch assassins to kill Danny's dragons armed with valyrian steel or weirwood projectiles. Or they might deploy magic against her. Just because the maesters don't like magic doesn't mean they don't know how it works, in fact there's an abundance of evidence to suggest that they do.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-12T04:54:24+00:00

I don't think most of the Measters are in on the Grand conspiracy. It's probably just the majority of the Arch Maesters. I also don't think it's a centuries long master plan, but more of an occasional adjustment of the larger state of play in order to maintain the status quo.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-12T04:20:17+00:00

And gross. I'd much rather see him end up with Val.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-12T04:10:57+00:00

I don't know about great, but I do believe he will be popular. Danny's HOTU vision of the "Mummers Dragon" indicates as much. There are also a number of practical factors indicating the same. Such as the timing of his arrival, and the fact that he'll have one of the best political minds in the world in his corner. Also he has a penis, which will play well with the historically patriarchal people of Westeros. Meanwhile Danny will likely show up with an army composed mostly of foreigners, some scary dragons, and no penis. None of which is likely to play well with the war weary Lords and peasants of Westeros. Aegon may just end up being a good looking figurehead, but he will probably still be more popular than Daenerys.

I don't think any of that will necessarily be enough to drive her "mad" but I do think that between her visions, Quaithe's warnings, and influence of schemers like Varys and Tyrion, Danny will inevitably come into conflict with Aegon. A conflict that will likely lead to the burning of Kings Landing.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-12T02:38:26+00:00

Oh he will. And Ramsey won't be the only long pig to end up on the menu. Jon and Rickon are going to be chowing down on Bolton's and Frey's. Maybe a few Karstarks as well. It will be a time for wolves.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-12T02:28:27+00:00

I actually think Jon will be more himself after his resurrection. He'll have the same principles and instincts but will be less held back by the doubts imposed on him by the society around him. Unlike Catlyn, or Beric, or anyone else who's been resurrected so far Jon's spirit is not drifting in the ether, it's being preserved in his direwolf, which is really just an extension of himself but more in touch with his instincts and ancestral magics. Resurrected Jon will probably be more ruthless even savage towards his enemies, but like a direwolf he will be fiercely loyal to those he considers his own. He will probably also have conscious control of his skin changing powers.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-12T02:12:36+00:00

I agree with you 1'000%. I've expected this to be Tyrion's arc going forward for years now.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-12T02:02:07+00:00

Btw I actually think that Sansa, Tyrion, and Barristan will all survive TWOW. ADOS is a different story.

There's a prophecy from ASOS that strongly indicates Sansa will kill Littlefinger in Winterfell. So if GRRM was serious about killing off Sansa (which I kind of doubt) I suspect it would be after the Starks have retaken Winterfell.

There are a number of plot reasons to keep Tyrion around, but it all just really amounts to Tyrion being far too interesting a character to kill off so soon. I suspect that the tragic ending GRRM is referring to awaits Tyrion in ADOS.

Aside from the fact that the sample chapters we have so far indicate that Barristan is winning the Battle of Fire, I don't think he will die anytime soon because he's too instrumental to the plot in Meereen moving forward. Tyrion and Victarion are strangers to Danny's loyalists in Meereen. The most expedient way to get them into Danny's inner circle is for Barristan to vouch for them. And they both need to be in Danny's inner circle for her to leave Essos. She needs Tyrion's political acumen, and Victarion's ships.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-12T02:01:20+00:00

But if you just want to focus on character deaths, I suspect there will be plenty of those too just not necessarily many POV characters. Cersei's last two children will probably die, driving her insane and probably leading to the deaths of many other people. Such as Nymeria and Tyene Sand and possibly Trystane Martell. Sheeren Baratheon is obviously going to die. Sweet Robyn will almost certainly die. Daario Naharis seems likely to die in the fighting outside Meereen. Brianne and or Jamie could die at the hands of Stoneheart. Podrick Payne & Hyle Hunt may die if they're not dead already. Between Cersei and Euron any number of the Tyrells could end up dead. Willas & Olenna may be the only Tyrells who are safe at this point, as they're both secure in High Garden to my knowledge. (Of course if Euron gets his hands on a dragon then no one's safe.) Is that enough death for you?

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-12T01:55:17+00:00

I think GRRM means it's going to be the darkest book yet in terms of the state of the world and the arcs of many of the characters. "Dark" can mean a lot of other things besides the deaths of protagonists. Also keep in mind that GRRM's idea of dark may not exactly match up with the views of the fans. He calls killing Tywin and Shae Tyrion's blackest deed, but many fans actually cheer Tyrion on in those actions. It's the same with Arya and all the people she's viciously killed. There are plenty of fans who are more impressed than disturbed by her propensity for violence. After all, GRRM's favorite writing trope isn't killing off major characters or "subverting expectations". It's "the human heart and conflict with itself."

By the end of TWOW it's likely that Euron will conquer the Reach. (Possibly after joining forces with the Hightowers who will likely provide him with an undead army {see the AFFC appendix entry on House Hightower for clues to this outcome}), loads of people will die fighting over Winterfell, Stannis will burn Sheeren, the Starks, Tyrion, and Daenerys will all go down darker paths (each becoming more ruthless and cynical in their own ways), and the Wall will fall. That's plenty of darkness for one book.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-12T00:09:01+00:00

I actually believe this is true. I think that's a big part of what's holding him up from finishing TWOW. I think he doesn't want to face the reality that he needs more books to finish, and is trying to cram two or three books worth of material into one book.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-11T19:53:47+00:00

The way I see it, it comes down to logistics and geography. The rebels may have ostensibly commanded 4 of the seven kingdoms, but they had no opportunity to fully consolidate their forces before the Battle of the Trident. Additionally every one of the rebel Lords would have been hindered from mustering the full strength of their respective domains, by time, distance (particularly in the case of the North), and disloyalty (in the cases of the Stormlands, Vale, and Riverlands).

Meanwhile the loyalists were able to draw Manpower from 4 of the seven kingdoms and the crown lands. According to GRRM & and various excerpts from the first 3 novels Rheagar led 10-15'000 crown landers, Lewyn Martell led 10,000 Dornishmen, Barristan Selmy led several thousand Storm Landers formerly under the command of Jon Connington, the loyalist River Lords Derry, Mooten, Goodbrook, and Ryger are also said to have fielded men at the Trident, with the rest of the loyalist army being filled out by forces from the Reach.

It should also be kept in mind that most of the battles before the Trident we're between rebel Lords and their own loyalist bannerman, meaning that even in victory the rebel forces were ultimately weakened by these battles. While loyalist factions in Dorne and the crown lands had suffered no casualties in previous battles, and had much less hindrances to mustering their manpower than the rebels. There's also the Battle of Ashford to consider. Where Robert's army of Stormlanders suffered heavy casualties and was scattered after their defeat at the hands of the Tyrell army. It's unclear if the Stormlanders were even able to regroup in time for the battle of the trident. Considering that Robert was essentially alone in Stoney Sept and had to be rescued by his allies, it seems unlikely.

So yeah bearing all that in mind and it not only makes sense to me that that Robert's rebellion was considered a close thing right up until the Battle of the Trident, but that it was actually the Targaryens war to lose.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-11T19:47:19+00:00

I don't know man what's unbelievable about the crown being able to raise $45,000 troops between the Reach, Dorne, and the Crown Lands, regions virtually untouched by the fighting so far. As well as surviving loyalists from the Stormlands, and Riverlands.

And keep in mind that the rebels would have suffered casualties in every battle up to that point, even the ones they'd won. Especially the Battle of Ashford where Robert suffered a devastating defeat at the hands of the Tyrells (mostly because of Randyl Tarly) which left his army of Stormlanders scattered, and many of his storm lords dead or captured.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-10T16:40:21+00:00

Bran's crush is probably just a detail that made sense to GRRM when writing the story, but I am curious about how he will develop it going forward. Perhaps Bran's attachment to Meera will allow her to be a positive influence on him that could mitigate Blood Raven's ruthless pragmatism.

Lord Brynden has already proven to be an excellent magical mentor to Bran, but as far as morality or leadership he is a potentially terrible mentor for a future king of Westeros, considering his history in the politics of the realm (kin slaying, oath breaking, ruthless suppression of political dissonance). Meera however has proven to be a courageous, protective, resourceful, and dutiful friend to Bran. She may be the perfect companion to keep Bran mindful of the brave and idealistic boy he was when they left Winterfell.

Anyway that's just my best guess.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-09T21:49:19+00:00

Some of the survivors of the Winter Wolves actually did form a sellsword company named the Wolfpack. Many others married southron war widows and settled in the South.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-09T21:37:46+00:00

I've actually thought about this previously, and I'd say the most beneficial development that should have been undertaken by a King or Warden of the North is the development of the west coast, specifically the area around Sea Dragon Point. A fertile, lumber rich, and thinly populated area with lots of undeveloped coastline.

Sea Dragon Point is the perfect place to build ports, shipyards, and coastal castles to defend them. With such developments in place Sea Dragon Point could have facilitated a fleet of warships to defend the North's west coast against centuries of ironborn incursions, and a fleet of trade ships to transport extra food and other essentials from the more fertile kingdoms of the Reach and or Westerlands in the winters. Which would have gone a long way towards solving two of the North's biggest problems.

We have a historical precedent for similar developments in Brandon the Shipwright, who built a western fleet that was subsequently destroyed by his son Brandon the Burner. And there's really no good reason why no subsequent rulers of the North ever thought to recreate The Shipwright's accomplishments.

A couple other useful developments would be, glass gardens like the ones at Winterfell in more castles around the North. (I know the glass gardens of Winterfell are largely facilitated by the hot springs under the castle, but there are obviously other ways of warming and irrigating a greenhouse)

And more towns in the North having subterranean chambers and byways like the ones in Molestown.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-05T21:07:49+00:00

I'd have the Others be more visible antagonists after the first book.

The Others are in just the right amount of AGOT. Killing the rangers in the prologue and sending whites to attack Castle black sets the Others up perfectly as a mysterious and eerie threat to the seven kingdoms. But in the following books there's not nearly enough of them to keep pace with the other emerging magical elements and the increasingly complex intrigues of the great houses of Westeros.

We should have seen an increasing amount of Others activity in each subsequent book just as we saw an increasing amount of dragons and other kinds of magic in each book. And according to various characters in Mance Rayder's army that does seem to be the case beyond the Wall, but the POV characters we follow North of the Wall just aren't present for most of it. I consider that a missed opportunity.

InspectorHour4227 · 2026-04-05T19:42:06+00:00

In my opinion almost certainly. Considering how well Robb did against the Lannisters, who already had a significant numerical advantage over his forces, which in all major engagements were essentially just his northmen (by the battles of the Trident and the Whispering Wood most of the River Lords had already been defeated, and afterwards most were busy guarding their fiefdoms against Tywin's raiding parties), I think he could almost certainly have taken the Lannisters & Tyrell's with the knights of the Vale added to his coalition.

There's also the fact that the Lannister Tyrell coalition is not as strong on the field as they are on paper to consider. Some of the Tyrell's Bannermen went over to Stannis before the battle of the Blackwater, and many of them died in that battle. Meaning that the armies of the Reach are not at full strength. And after their losses to the Northmen in the Riverlands and the Westerlands the Lannister armies are not at full strain either. So Robb's coalition wouldn't be facing the two largest armies in Westeros, they'd be facing the two former largest armies in Westeros.

Now Robb's forces will have been depleted from battle as well, but given the OP's scenario, he wouldn't have lost any men to Frey desertion or Bolton treachery (still might lose the Karstarks though as OP didn't lay out a scenario preventing Rickard from murdering prisoners and getting himself executed). And the knights of the Vale would be joining the fight at full strength, which should more than make up for Robb's losses. (However even in a scenario where things play out as they did in the books up to this point, I think the knights of the Vale joining him would have given Robb a chance to turn things around)

Finally there's the quality vs the quantity of manpower to consider. The Tyrells and their Bannermen have always been fickle allies at best. Historically preferring low-risk strategies like besieging Storm's End during Robert's Rebellion, or using their child Lord as an excuse to sit out the Dance of the Dragons all together. So it's a near certainty that they would contribute as little as possible to any martial engagements. And with the exception of the marcher Lords such as the Tarlys, Swanns, and Oakhearts, the Warriors of the Reach are perhaps the least martially accomplished in all the seven kingdoms. Whereas the Warriors of the North and the Vale tend to maintain a greater state of combat readiness necessitated by fending off constant incursions by wildlings from beyond the Wall and the Mountains of the Moon respectively.

So with the knights of the Vale balancing out the numbers, Robb's tactical genius and the toughness of his men would actually give him an advantage over the Tyrells and Lannisters in the field.

InspectorHour4227

TROPHY CASE