A Song Of Ice And Fire

Who knows who'll live, especially with the direction the show is going right now.

And we don't even know if that's how the last two books are going to go.

It's not. Martin's already expressed annoyance that Barristan got killed off when his role is supposed to be rather big in the new book. It's almost certainly going to proceed and end differently, unless that ending is the Others/White Walkers conquering Westeros and the rest of Planetos.

I think the ending will be broadly the same but how we get there won't.

That is fair. He did say that if he never finishes A Dream of Spring to take the ending as the ending of the books, though he said nothing about the path to that ending.

Yeah, with Barristan in charge Mereen doesn't need Dany on Drogon to bale them out. The Unsullied and Brazen Beasts are kicking ass.

For now

This is one of Martin's books. The Slavers' army was tossing bodies over the walls with sickness at the end of Dance, so I don't think it lasts long.

Yes, but at the same time the Unsullied were destroying the trebuchets, the Ironborn were wrecking shop in the bay, the dragons were destroying stuff, and the Windblown had gone over to Dany's side.

It only takes one corpse getting over for the disease to spread. It's implied they got several over the walls.

I'm still expecting Dany to arrive as Barristan is dying from wounds he got saving the city. He then tells her she should head back to Westeros before dying.

It's dysentery, right? Not anthrax. As long as none of them landed in the water supply, it might be dangerous but it's not instant death to the city. There have been several breakouts mentioned in the series that haven't resulted in mass death; apparently it's even reported in King's Landing in Clash.

Plus all they have to do is burn the bodies that got launched over the walls. Selmy would likely know to do that.

Question for all of you.

Do little Frey children deserve to die because of Red Wedding?

No, why would they? The children had nothing to do with it.

No, but if they do get caught in the cross-fire (as they already have) I wouldn't call it too terrible of an action because really it's Walder's fault here that he lowered the rules of engagement to this extent.

Freys are the definitive Hate Sink, so I wouldn't be surprised if they helped in the Red Wedding. Though I've always wondered if the Freys have always been loathsome, or if Walder Frey turned the house from a disrespected but normal house to the Hate Sink house

While I instinctively winced at this answer, there is some truth to it — the reason there is value in respecting agreed rules of engagement (to answer the people who buy Tywin's snappy "dozen people at dinner" line) is that if you stop respecting them, who's to say which one goes off the table next? Maybe your enemy is horrified by killing under truce but never realised what the big deal was about child murder, and hey, if we don't have to follow the rules any more...

So there's some karmic justice there for Walder, in that savagery begets savagery — but its important not to go that extra step and justify that second act of savagery. Killing children is still evil, even if someone else was evil to you first.

The Frey children could be fostered off or given to the Faith, with their title attainted the House is just as dead. Of course, Enfant Terrible Big Walder exists to test this conclusion, because Martin never wants anything to be too easy.

The "dozen people at dinner" line was in the series only, if I remember correctly - and even then it was still incorrect, considering hundreds of people were murdered that day.

Tywin was actually pretty critical of the Red Wedding in the books - because they made a spectactle out of it instead of discreetly assassinating Robb.

He didn't see a problem with breaking Sacred Hospitality, as long as there was some plausible deniability - same reason he let the Boltons and Freys handle that thing themselves in the first place, to avoid getting directly tangled up in this mess.

The Freys did make a mess and most people are pretty much aware of who was behind it at the end - but Tywin was not the one hosting the Starks at his keep, so he never actually violated any customs himself. He used Walder Frey as a pawn and Walder was stupid and petty enough to damn his whole house in the eyes of Westerosi society.

It doesn't help that belonging to a noble house often means you're going to be treated as guilty by association - if your patriarch does something you disapprove of? Even if you openly and decisively break with your house, you will still be either mocked for your family's deeds or accused of being accessory to them. :/

Also for all his asshole behaviour, Walder Frey does value family - it's why he keeps all his descendents around in his keep and feeds them after all, even if some of them are completely useless to him. Family is what Walder Freys built his strenght on - so naturally, it's the one thing people will gun for to get at him.

Edited by DrunkenNordmann on Sep 5th 2018 at 3:47:33 PM

As I said, I still think it's wrong to kill children, but the karmic value of this kind of action is alleviated somewhat by the fact it was Walder who chucked the rules of warfare to begin with. Case in point, Wyman Manderly's son being butchered. Sure, kids don't deserve to be killed, but the lines get grayer in this case due Walder's actions. So it's still absolutely reprehensible, but not as reprehensible.

Tywin's biggest flaw is a lack of subtlety. His reaction to a son he loathed being kidnapped was to send a gigantic thug with a party of rapists to carouse around the Riverlands destroying things, rather than confronting Eddard about it. Not to mention the way he dealt with the Reynes and Tarbecks the same way that people are now dealing with the Freys.

Plus, his actions during Robert's Rebellion. Instead of throwing his lot in with the rebels he decided to maul King's Landing, brutally murder the prince's children, and rape and murder his wife. And then just went "Well how was I supposed to know they'd go that far?"

The only thing that kept Tywin safe all those years was his money that could buy enough swords to create a formidable army. He has no right to talk about "subtlety."

Edited by theLibrarian on Sep 5th 2018 at 12:50:58 PM

Tywin makes a show of overdoing it, so as to send the message "Do not cross House Lannister." He will stand absolutely no slight against the house, and goes out of his way to keep people from so much as whispering derisive things about them.

Tywin wants House Lannister to be feared, given that his father saw the house decline a great deal during his time as head of the family.

Walder, however, wants House Frey to be on top and will get there through any means necessary. Problem is, everyone else fights fire with fire, so to speak, and in a game of politics, Walder Frey has zero genre savviness. Sure, he gets a short term victory, but in teh long term, the entire north and riverlands hates him and are taking every opportunity to gleefully murder every Frey they can get their hands on. And then there's Lady Stoneheart...

His actions against the Reynes and Tarbecks was probably what was necessary. I've often argued that out of all his asshole moves that one was probably the most justified.

But overall Tywin's not a fantastic strategist or tactician, he screws up a lot, including outright losing a pitched battle to Edmure of all people. He mainly gets by on the fear he imposes rather than actual skill, and that's why his house is in a poorer position currently than those Tyrells who are equally immoral but who have a completely different PR strategy that fakes kindness rather than trying to create intimidation.

Edited by Sigilbreaker26 on Sep 5th 2018 at 9:47:16 AM

I find it frustrating that ASOIAF causes people to walk away feeling that killing children is good or at least necessary.

That being said, I have assumed that all of the Freys at the Twins were "in on the Red Wedding", as they'd kind of need to be so as not to freak out and impede the massacre when it stated going down. So, I've assumed that all of the Frey girls shown to Robb knew about the Red Wedding and that Fat Walda's active role in Edmure's bedding meant she was an active co-conspirator. Which wouldn't be surprising, since her husband was one of the masterminds.

So, no I'm not saying that the little Frey girls deserve to die, but there's definitely some moral culpability for everyone at the Twins, even though I can understand and sympathize with the pressure (and threats of violence) that people were under that lead them to keep quiet.

I wonder how things would have gone if one of them had second thoughts and warned the Starks. Do you think they could have preemptively stopped the massacre without alerting the Freys that they know?

Didn't they send away anyone they deemed too sympathetic like Olyvar?