A Song Of Ice And Fire

Why does everyone assume Rickon's gonna die? I've always kind of assumed he's gonna end up Lord of Winterfell while all the more important Stark kids die or have a more interesting fate.

Like, 'does there really need to be six Starks kids?' was probably one of the first questions GRRM's editor asked. For the answer to that the question to be 'yes' requires something pretty important to be in store for Rickon.

Considering that unlike in the show he's on Skagos (as dangerous as that is) instead of being hosted by the Umbers to hand over to Ramsay, I'd say he's definitely safe for now.

Yeah. Probably.

Though I won't call him exactly suitable.

Clearly Rickon will rule the North with his barbarian tyrant fist. And Shaggy. Shaggy can be the Stark mascot.

King Rickon will marry Shireen and rule the North with Shaggydog by his side and Davos as his Regent and then right hand man.

Shaggydog is going to spend the rest of his time with Queen Shireen.◊

Also no more direwolves will die.

edited 19th Jan '17 1:19:03 PM by MadSkillz

Where do you find that? And that wolf is too small.

Just type Shireen Rickon into google. It's a semi-popular toy ship. People like Shireen and they want to make her into a Stark. Also if I were Stannis I'd bind the North to me by betrothing Rickon to Shireen.

You'll find cute Shaggydog/Rickon/Shireen pics like this.◊

They never get her jaw right though.◊

Yeah.

I like Shireen two. I hope she lives through it all.

But she won't.

My prediction for Rickon is that he's on Skagos, being worshipped as Warg King because direwolf. He's almost entirely lost himself in Shaggydog. Davos is forced to promise the Skags the right to raise fleets again (denied by the Starks after the last rebellion ; cf Tyrion arming the mountain clans or Cersei restoring the Faith Militant) to get them to bring Rickon to the mainland.

They sail up the Weeping Water and seize the Dreadfort; the Savage Wolf takes this as his new seat.

Stannis tries to use him as his Stark pawn, but he's uncontrollable. The eventual ruler of Winterfell is forced to deal with Shaggydog and the Skaagosi fighting with neighbouring lords, especially the new wildling Houses.

He doesn't necessarily die at the end, but I hope he doesn't end up ruling Winterfell, because I can't see anything that suggests he'd do that well. The one exception is if Sansa uses all she's learned from Joffrey and Sweetrobin to serve as his Regent.

Direwolf master race! All hail King Shaggy!

Henceforth, all direwolves will be known as shaggywolves!

W00t!

I brought this up before but I'll say it again. If Robb or Stannis had convinced the other to form an alliance by betrothing Rickon and Shireen this entire mess could have been avoided.

Indeed. But then the books would have been a whole lot shorter.

Plus Stannis likely would have refused it anyway unless Robb bent the knee to him and abdicated his title as King in the North.

Yeah, Robb could have avoided getting killed that one time had he declared for Stannis.

I wonder if Stannis would have been fine with letting Robb declare the North independent. I don't think he would have accepted that. Baratheons were always close to the Targaryens, and it is generally accepted in the realm that the "Seven Kingdoms" belong under one throne. Not many outside the North would have accepted the secession, and among the families close to the throne, the Baratheons were probably the least willing to see the throne weakened.

Robert and Renly would eventually be allowed to accept the independence of the North...Robert out of sentiment, and Renly in a "Well it's big, there aren't many people there, the few that there are bores, they don't follow our gods and there's not a lot of money"...way of dismissal.

Stannis however would never under any circumstances allow North independence. He's a strict centralist who believes that Westeros should be one united realm, "This talk of Seven Kingdoms is folly". And if the North complain and whine about their oppression under the Iron Throne, Stannis would say, "Okay maybe your smallfolk would like to go back to the old days when your lords could use Droit du Seigneur which the dragons made you get rid off...over your protests...or that nice Kingsroad that regulates movement and travel within the region, or maybe they would like to remember that time that King Aegon V the Unlikely gave them food relief during a winter preventing Northmen from going suicide march down South as useless mouths"...because independence means walking away from all that. It's Northexit.

Also the other problem is that Robb isn't just King in the North...he's King in the North and the Riverlands. The Riverlands is the Hub Level of Westeros, the center of transport that binds movement and traffic from most of Westeros. Without it, Westeros can't effectively function as a central state. And the Riverlands is also hard enough to defend because it's never really had true independence. The close it ever had was autonomy which the Targaryens gave them. The only real peace that land ever knew was under the Targaryens and Aegon I was the best thing that ever happened to them.

The Riverlands, as part of a Northern kingdom, would be mostly surrounded by the primary kingdom of Westeros. To make it more secure by removing a potential front, they would want to include the Vale in a Northern kingdom. Diplomatically, that sounds feasible, if only the Vale wasn't led by a staunch isolationist (who is also a puppet of a more clever player the the Game - remind you of anyone?)

So a Northern Kingdom that includes the Riverlands and the Vale (somehow I don't see those proud Andal-Lords bowing down to a Northern King given their pride, hauteur and history of wars over the Sisters Islands with the North...nostalgia for Southron Ambitions Alliance notwithstanding).

That would kill the unified Westeros state.

The Seven Kingdoms would be the united Westerlands-Reach-Stormlands-Dorne and those four have huge histories of grudges and the Crownlands would be incapable of handling it, reducing quickly to a Vestigial Empire. That's actually why Stannis won't tolerate secession, it simply makes it harder to deal with the remaining kingdoms and uphold some amount of unity.

And you know I just don't see any justifications for Northern independence in the current scenario...where Stannis, a Southron King, is coming to liberate them from Northman collaborators like the Boltons. Stannis' ideas of being King involve the duties of royalty and justice is the primary one.

No, Stannis was not fine with Robb being independent. He specifically targeted Robb when he did that blood magic thing with Melisandre.

After Ned's execution, no one wanted an independent North but the North bannermen. Once the northern lords and ladies declared for Robb for King. Robb had to accept and so did the Riverlords.

Robert wouldn't give up half his realm's landmass for nostalgia nor would Renly's ambition let him give up the north either.

Blackfish could have told Robb and Cat which Valelords were most anxious to help out Ned's cause (if he knew) and Robb could have appealed to them directly but that could have caused a civil war in the Vale civil which helps no one.

At best, I could see Robert trying to solve things peacefully(or well, as much that concept can apply to Robert) but eventually give in and declare war on the north.

Under Robert's rule, Ned would have been safe from harm, at least long enough to make himself safe for real (by figuring out and proving what happened to his predecessor as Hand). Thus, no casus belli for the North, and no conflict to begin with. Robert would never have been faced with this problem.

I think your attributing modern motives to a medieval person. Stands mostly wants to rule the whole realm because he inherited the whole realm, and therefore it is his duty.

Yeah, Robert likely would have tried to make peace with Ned.

I think your attributing modern motives to a medieval person. Stands mostly wants to rule the whole realm because he inherited the whole realm, and therefore it is his duty.

I assume you mean "Stannis" instead of Stands...but anyway typos happen. So let me get to the argument.

There are a huge number of problems with that.

1) ASOIAF is fantasy and it is based somewhat on real historical feudalism but it is intended for a modern audience and some parts of the book comment on and reflect modern experiences.

2) Saying that Stannis wouldn't have modern motives implies that he is a typical representative of Westerosi feudalism when he is in fact an exception. Stannis is meritocratic rather than aristocratic, he appoints Davos the ex-Smuggler to be his Hand on merit. He wants to bring Wildlings into Westeros as subjects, something nobody (neither Stark, Targaryen or Martell to name the three "philanthropic" houses) has ever done or would have done. He is also practicing and subscribing to a foreign religion which whatever else you can say about it is sex-positive and open to women as priests and popes. Stannis reflects viewpoints from a later or even an early-modern view of feudalism rather than a medieval mentality and as a character he is meant to comment on how such ideas were regarded as anathema, actively opposed or provoked reprisals in a medieval era until society accepted it.

3) Stannis explicitly tells us what his political vision of Westeros is:
—>Stannis Baratheon: This talk of Seven Kingdoms is a folly. Aegon saw that three hundred years ago when he stood where we are standing. They painted this table at his command. Rivers and bays they painted, hills and mountains, castles and cities and market towns, lakes and swamps and forests... but no borders. It is all one. One realm, for one king to rule alone.
—>Ser Davos Seaworth: One King means peace.

Does that sound like a guy who would ever like the idea of secession. In Stannis' Vision, the North would be renamed as North Westeros and there would be the United Kingdom of Westeros. He more or less looks at Aegon's Painted Table like Kylo Ren contemplating the bust of Vader and mutters, "I will complete your work".

edited 21st Jan '17 10:29:01 PM by JulianLapostat