Poll: Stannis vs. Daenerys - Better claim?

[Silvanus]

Well no matter how strong the claim, nothing can help the fact Stannis has a warscore of like 0% atm.

He's actually got a better record in war than almost any other character. He commanded (and won) the defence of Storm's End, the siege of Dragonstone, and the battles of Fair Isle and Great Wyk during the Greyjoy Rebellion. He was victorious at the Battle of the Wall and the seige of Deepwood Motte.

He lost at Blackwater Bay, but it was a close thing, and he was taken by an unanticipated third force.

 

[Wuvlycuddles]

He's actually got a better record in war than almost any other character. He commanded (and won) the defence of Storm's End, the siege of Dragonstone, and the battles of Fair Isle and Great Wyk during the Greyjoy Rebellion. He was victorious at the Battle of the Wall and the seige of Deepwood Motte.

He lost at Blackwater Bay, but it was a close thing, and he was taken by an unanticipated third force.

Sorry the warscore comment was entirely in reference to CK 2 mechanics, where Stannis would **technically** be the usurper and controlling less than 51% of the de jure kingdom with no significant wins against the crown. Battle of the Wall and Deepwood Motte, while victories, are not victories against the Lannisters and therefore would not contribute to the warscore against the crown.... does this make sense? Ck 2 is a complicated game at times.

 

[Grahav]

Well, now that the show used character assassination to make their Magical Draconic Mary Sue look good, I vote for...

The White Walkers.

Really, cover everything in darkness and ice.

Spoiler

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Well, now that the show used character assassination to make their Magical Draconic Mary Sue look good, I vote for...

The White Walkers.

Really, cover everything in darkness and ice.

Spoiler

Nice summation you found there.

Remember though, the changes to the show make it more exciting! And complaining about it is just for bitter book fans who cannot appreciate all the fun deviations!

 

[RedDeadFred]

Well, now that the show used character assassination to make their Magical Draconic Mary Sue look good, I vote for...

The White Walkers.

Really, cover everything in darkness and ice.

Spoiler

This perfectly encapsulates everything that has annoyed me about this season. I've been a pretty big supporter of them doing things differently from the books (I like not knowing what will happen next), but so many of the changes this season have been really awful. They ruined the Mannis and they killed of one of the most badass characters from the books in favour of the awful Grey Worm romance.

I'm not sure why you'd call Danny a Mary Sue though. Mary Sues are supposed to be perfect. Danny burned a man alive right after she had been warned about how her mad father used to do it. Another fucked up change.

 

[Passive Aggression]

Nice summation you found there.

Remember though, the changes to the show make it more exciting! And complaining about it is just for bitter book fans who cannot appreciate all the fun deviations!

According to the "Insider" for the GoT show, GRRM told D&D that, that's how it goes down in the books. Whilst, it's likely sped up for the sake of the show, and it probably happens at a different point in time, it's basically confirmed that, regardless of the "Deviations" It's still the fate of that character in the books as well.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Nice summation you found there.

Remember though, the changes to the show make it more exciting! And complaining about it is just for bitter book fans who cannot appreciate all the fun deviations!

According to the "Insider" for the GoT show, GRRM told D&D that, that's how it goes down in the books. Whilst, it's likely sped up for the sake of the show, and it probably happens at a different point in time, it's basically confirmed that, regardless of the "Deviations" It's still the fate of that character in the books as well.

I thought he just told them how the overarching storylines resolve. How they get to the end that he told them is up to them. They've had characters fill different roles and do different things, I'm still holding on to the hope that Stannis doesn't go this far in the books too.

Otherwise: Mannis status will be revoked!

 

[Terminal Blue]

According to the "Insider" for the GoT show, GRRM told D&D that, that's how it goes down in the books. Whilst, it's likely sped up for the sake of the show, and it probably happens at a different point in time, it's basically confirmed that, regardless of the "Deviations" It's still the fate of that character in the books as well.

Yeah. Stannis...

Spoiler

killing Shireen

...was foreshadowed as far back as book 2 when Stannis first appears. It makes more sense in the books, where the whole mythology of Azor Ahai and Lightbringer and Stannis' relationship to both is explained in more detail, than it did purely in the context of the TV Show.

Seriously, I didn't get R + L = J on my own, but I got that one.

At the very least, if it or something very similar wasn't GRRM's intent, I'm smelling some serious red herring.

 

[WolfThomas]

According to the "Insider" for the GoT show, GRRM told D&D that, that's how it goes down in the books. Whilst, it's likely sped up for the sake of the show, and it probably happens at a different point in time, it's basically confirmed that, regardless of the "Deviations" It's still the fate of that character in the books as well.

Spoiler: It may well happen in the books but the circumstances will be very different *Huge Book Spoilers*

Stannis the book is physically hundreds of miles away from Melissandre, Selyse and Shireen. Who all stay at Castle Black when he marches on Winterfell.

At the end of ADWD he's presumed dead (but without any evidence). If she gets sacrificed in the books it's not going to be with his permission. Probably a poorly though out reaction from Selyse and Mel. As Jon Snow has purposely sent away at that point all the others with King's Blood (Maester Aemon and Mance Rayder's son).

Probably the sacrifice in turn will resurrect the betrayed and stabbed many times Jon Snow

 

[Grahav]

This perfectly encapsulates everything that has annoyed me about this season. I've been a pretty big supporter of them doing things differently from the books (I like not knowing what will happen next), but so many of the changes this season have been really awful. They ruined the Mannis and they killed of one of the most badass characters from the books in favour of the awful Grey Worm romance.

I'm not sure why you'd call Danny a Mary Sue though. Mary Sues are supposed to be perfect. Danny burned a man alive right after she had been warned about how her mad father used to do it. Another fucked up change.

Pushing a straight up Mary Sue would ruin the show (more). She is toned down a bit but you can see traits. Fought over by hot men (Daario and Jorah), said to be the prettiest woman in the world, commands dragons with magic (important detail, not religious magic...), child of destiny.

One of the fun, and more interesting parts of the show, as seen in this forum, was the discussion of who would be the better King or Queen. Mannis or Dany. What happened kiled that. Stannis sacrifices the daughter that he wanted as his heir for a military gain (after his army of thousands gets punked by "20 good men" and villain Stu Ramsay) instead of something like beating the whole army of the dead while Dany in a tough situation pulls a dragon Jesus miracle out of nowhere.

In politics it would be equivalent of finding that one of the candidates of the presidential election is a pedophile. The adversary would celebrate, no hard work, no debates, no hard thinking necessary anymore.

Speaking about. Remember how Aria's mental health should degrade as she murdered people that while corrupt weren't straight murderers themselves? Now she will hunt paedos. Wow, how intelectually difficult!

Nice summation you found there.

Remember though, the changes to the show make it more exciting! And complaining about it is just for bitter book fans who cannot appreciate all the fun deviations!

If the changes were inteligent, deep and for the better, at least...

I have a new expression on my english vocabulary.

Emotional Porn. Or EmoPorn for shorts.

Spoiler

Tv adapations are never 100% faithful to the books but the least they could do is respect the way the characters are presented in the books. Book Stannis and tv show Stannis are two radically different characters because D&D don?t understand the character - they say Stannis is power hungry and obsessed with power which is clearly not true. Stannis has been gotten wrong since the beginning. It?s the same when Dany is presented as the ultimate savior whe in reality she?s 15 and has no experience whatsoever of ruling.

Also, it is absurd that they build up Stannis?s personality to be sympathetic in this last season and developed Shireen?s personality to be sweet and cute just to kill her in a horrible manner. It is not good character writing, it is not good character development - it is not how character development works, you don?t need to be a writer to know this. Gods, just read Tolstoy, he can teach D&D about proper character development and how it should be done. D&D clearly believe that this is the kind of thing that ?good series? do - but it is not. They have let themselves be blinded by the need to add a shocking episode at the end of every season in order to keep it in line with the trope/joke that ?all our favourites die?.

Only, good series do not sell and twist the characters out to build up some sort of emotional porn. And it was so obviously clear! It was literally, ?let?s make this child very cute and nice so we can burn her in the end!?

Lastly, I have a right to complain about whatever I want to complain and according to the notes and to most people I?ve read, I?m not alone. Enjoy the series whatever you want, but you?ll probably have to resign yourself to the fact that people who genuinely like the characters will be pissed at how they?ve been butchered.

http://frederick-the-great.tumblr.com/

 

[K12]

Putting it simply. The better claimant is the one who wins.

 

[Smooth Operator]

The guy with power comes first, second is his lineage. If it was the other way around Stannis would simply be accepted as king and that would be the end of it, but no the guys in power now are Lanisters and they have no intention of giving it up unless someone can overpower them.

Would Stannis have won the battle for the city the first time around then he would have sat on the throne, would Stark have conquered Lanisters/King's Landing he would sit on the throne, if Daenerys can bring her armies to bear against the city she can get the throne,...
There is no shortage of claims, question is who has the power to secure his claim.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Lastly, I have a right to complain about whatever I want to complain and according to the notes and to most people I?ve read, I?m not alone. Enjoy the series whatever you want, but you?ll probably have to resign yourself to the fact that people who genuinely like the characters will be pissed at how they?ve been butchered.

You're absolutely correct that you have a right to complain about whatever you want. But I can't help but wonder if you've confusing "liking" characters for having a better understanding of them or their arcs than those who don't share your like.

It strikes me as a little too close to the "but you just don't get it!" argument.

Furthermore, does this particular instance actually impact on whether Stannis would be a good king, as you suggest, or does it merely impact on your ability to continue "liking" the character? If anything, the willingness to make hard sacrifices would seem to me to be a trait of a good king, assuming the sacrifice doesn't turn out to be completely pointless (which would in and of itself be a pretty interesting nihilistic twist). It also lends credence to the idea that Stannis might actually be Azor Ahai and thus pays off a lot of the foreshadowing present in the books.

You talk about "emotional porn", but, and I don't mean this to sound as harsh as it will, if what you want is simply to have characters you personally like continue to be likable and winning and never do stupid or regrettable things (speaking of which, you and I both know how Arya's paedo-hunting adventure is going to end) then is that not simply a different kind of emotional porn? All media is built to exploit the emotions of the audience. That's what makes it entertaining in the first place.

I mean, that Dorne subplot was dumb and took god-knows-how-many episodes of forgettable padding and hilariously poorly choreographed action sequences to basically get to an just-about-okay resolution while also writing out one of the more effective female characters at this point in the books, so it's not like I can't see where you're coming from on some things, but the kind of pseudo-elitist assumption of greater "understanding" just seems to poison every single one of these discussions. To be extremely blunt, Stannis Baratheon isn't a real person. Technically, you don't "understand" him better than anyone because there isn't a real person to "understand".

I don't "like" Stannis or Dany, not in the books and not in the TV show. I tend to resent any character I feel I'm "supposed" to like anyway and be skeptical of things which look like easy resolutions. From where I'm sitting this isn't so hard to understand.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

According to the "Insider" for the GoT show, GRRM told D&D that, that's how it goes down in the books. Whilst, it's likely sped up for the sake of the show, and it probably happens at a different point in time, it's basically confirmed that, regardless of the "Deviations" It's still the fate of that character in the books as well.

Oh, so Jaime and Bronn go to Dorne, and have a Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers fight with three Sand Snakes, and then return with Trystane? That will be quite an accomplishment if that is "how it goes down in the books". I'll also be impressed if Ramsay and 20 guys slip out and burn down the camp's entire stockpile/siege weapon supply right under Melisandre's nose, given she's at Castle Black.

You ARE aware that how you arrive at a point actually means something. The quality of something isn't simply determined by whether or not the same people end up dead.

The show is fucking junk at this point. I cannot imagine people defending shit like this Dorne storyline, unless they are simply desperate to deflect criticism of something that USED to be decent.

You're absolutely correct that you have a right to complain about whatever you want. But I can't help but wonder if you've confusing "liking" characters for having a better understanding of them or their arcs than those who don't share your like.

He's absolutely right. They either don't understand the characters, or cheerfully change them to something they prefer.

Tyrion is probably the strongest example of this, he's been whitewashed so effectively at this point virtually nothing of his book personality is left. He's just a quip machine at this point who commits one noble act after another.

I don't doubt that book Stannis WOULD burn Shireen. They've just done such a horrible job establishing the Azor Ahai storyline, the prophecy of the Long Night and the war against the darkness, and Stannis's utter commitment to duty that the character comes off as easily duped/changeable. You tear away all the context and complexities of characters, and the reading of those characters suffers terribly.

The usual excuse for D&D is "they don't have time for all that on the show", but they piss away SO much time on complete wankery. Like last night's extended "Meryn Trant is a pedophile because we never miss an opportunity for some squick" sequence. Or that interminable Grey Worm/Missandei horseshit. Or the entire character of Ros. It goes on and on.

They're horrendous writers, and it shows every time they deviate from the material.

 

[Passive Aggression]

Oh, so Jaime and Bronn go to Dorne, and have a Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers fight with three Sand Snakes, and then return with Trystane? That will be quite an accomplishment if that is "how it goes down in the books". I'll also be impressed if Ramsay and 20 guys slip out and burn down the camp's entire stockpile/siege weapon supply right under Melisandre's nose, given she's at Castle Black.

You ARE aware that how you arrive at a point actually means something. The quality of something isn't simply determined by whether or not the same people end up dead.

The show is fucking junk at this point. I cannot imagine people defending shit like this Dorne storyline, unless they are simply desperate to deflect criticism of something that USED to be decent.

I'm just saying what was said on the inside episode, no reason to be a jerk.

 

[Loonyyy]

Regarding the recent events on the show, I think Stannis will get there in the books too, either that, or it will become a significant conflict for him, as he brushes up against the legend of Azor Azhai. So I think that book Stannis might eventually do it, or come to the point where he has to do it, and fails. In either case, I think it might break him.

In either case, the show fucks it up, again. 20 good men. I mean fucking really. Good work guys, good work. Ramsay is a suicidal dumbass who succeeds by writer fiat and completely fucks up any sort of investment in the politics of the series by making a mockery of the entire concept of an army. Because it's important to be aggressive and unexpected, by venturing out into the extreme winter (And the winter is a serious threat. Fucking hell, it's the motto of the Starks for a reason. WINTER IS COMING.>> YOU'LL FUCKING FREEZE TO DEATH). It honestly reminds me of the leaders in Generation Kill, insisting on maintaining the "Violence of action" and the importance of "Being aggressive", when it means attacking positions that may be held by tanks with humvees to earn their commanders medals, calling danger close airstrikes that would kill their own men, and because of their insistence on aggression, missing opportunities.

It's as ridiculous as his ludicrous barechested fighting scene last season, and the deserter leader played by Burn Gorman in Craster's keep.

I don't think in the show either of their claims really matters. This won't be decided legally. They're both hated, Stannis at least gaining a following in the North, in the end, both of them will try to win by conquest. I think Stannis has the better claim, as he's the heir under the current line of succession, while Daenerys is the heir to a deposed line of rulers who's last king set the entire kingdom to war, out of his mad obsession with burning people alive.

 

[Grahav]

Lastly, I have a right to complain about whatever I want to complain and according to the notes and to most people I?ve read, I?m not alone. Enjoy the series whatever you want, but you?ll probably have to resign yourself to the fact that people who genuinely like the characters will be pissed at how they?ve been butchered.

You're absolutely correct that you have a right to complain about whatever you want. But I can't help but wonder if you've confusing "liking" characters for having a better understanding of them or their arcs than those who don't share your like.

It strikes me as a little too close to the "but you just don't get it!" argument.

Furthermore, does this particular instance actually impact on whether Stannis would be a good king, as you suggest, or does it merely impact on your ability to continue "liking" the character? If anything, the willingness to make hard sacrifices would seem to me to be a trait of a good king, assuming the sacrifice doesn't turn out to be completely pointless (which would in and of itself be a pretty interesting nihilistic twist). It also lends credence to the idea that Stannis might actually be Azor Ahai and thus pays off a lot of the foreshadowing present in the books.

You talk about "emotional porn", but, and I don't mean this to sound as harsh as it will, if what you want is simply to have characters you personally like continue to be likable and winning and never do stupid or regrettable things (speaking of which, you and I both know how Arya's paedo-hunting adventure is going to end) then is that not simply a different kind of emotional porn? All media is built to exploit the emotions of the audience. That's what makes it entertaining in the first place.

I mean, that Dorne subplot was dumb and took god-knows-how-many episodes of forgettable padding and hilariously poorly choreographed action sequences to basically get to an just-about-okay resolution while also writing out one of the more effective female characters at this point in the books, so it's not like I can't see where you're coming from on some things, but the kind of pseudo-elitist assumption of greater "understanding" just seems to poison every single one of these discussions. To be extremely blunt, Stannis Baratheon isn't a real person. Technically, you don't "understand" him better than anyone because there isn't a real person to "understand".

I don't "like" Stannis or Dany, not in the books and not in the TV show. I tend to resent any character I feel I'm "supposed" to like anyway and be skeptical of things which look like easy resolutions. From where I'm sitting this isn't so hard to understand.

You have a good point. And I do(id) like(d) Stannis.

The deal is how it was done. Bad script, bad writing, character assassination. Didn't feel like it was a tough choice, felt more like: "See? See?! He is evil!" . It could have been a genuine teeth grinding, emotional, difficult, HIGH point of the show. It was complete garbage instead.

If you want a comparison to another moment, take Jaime's reunion with Cersei:

There are 2 ways to see that scene.

A. It was rape. If so, it came out of completely fucking nowhere.

B. It was not rape. If so, the producers have a really screwed up view of "not rape".

Either interpretation leads to the conclusion that it was junk writing.

Spoiler

He's absolutely right. They either don't understand the characters, or cheerfully change them to something they prefer.

Tyrion is probably the strongest example of this, he's been whitewashed so effectively at this point virtually nothing of his book personality is left. He's just a quip machine at this point who commits one noble act after another.

I don't doubt that book Stannis WOULD burn Shireen. They've just done such a horrible job establishing the Azor Ahai storyline, the prophecy of the Long Night and the war against the darkness, and Stannis's utter commitment to duty that the character comes off as easily duped/changeable. You tear away all the context and complexities of characters, and the reading of those characters suffers terribly.

The usual excuse for D&D is "they don't have time for all that on the show", but they piss away SO much time on complete wankery. Like last night's extended "Meryn Trant is a pedophile because we never miss an opportunity for some squick" sequence. Or that interminable Grey Worm/Missandei horseshit. Or the entire character of Ros. It goes on and on.

They're horrendous writers, and it shows every time they deviate from the material.

This guy is really nailing it:

http://frederick-the-great.tumblr.com/

Spoiler

Anonymous asked: lol what did u expect!??? we all saw this a mile ago! its pretty much hinted to happen in the books possibly by the next book. GRRM has been advising and working with D&D on the changes. he has actually approved of them all. Stannis's obsession with being AA has been going on from his first appearance on the show and the books. GRRM''s theme for obsession has been that it always leads to madness if we dont recognize it for what it is and stop it. Stannis was never going to recognize it

mine-by-right:

No way book!Stannis will burn Shireen, anon. That flies directly in the face of what we?re told about their relationship in the text.

?Do smugglers have another name for it? I made him Hand, and he would have sold my rights for a bowl of pease porridge. He would even have given them Shireen. Mine only child, he would have wed to a bastard born of incest.?

- A Storm of Swords

?It is not a question of wanting. The throne is mine, as Robert?s heir. That is law. After me, it must pass to my daughter, unless Selyse should finally give me a son.? He ran three fingers lightly down the table, over the layers of smooth hard varnish, dark with age. ?I am king. Wants do not enter into it. I have a duty to my daughter. To the realm. Even to Robert. He loved me but little, I know, yet he was my brother.?

- A Storm of Swords

?It may be that we shall lose this battle,? the king said grimly. ?In Braavos you may hear that I am dead. It may even be true. You shall find my sellswords nonetheless.?

The knight hesitated. ?Your Grace, if you are dead ??

?? you will avenge my death, and seat my daughter on the Iron Throne. Or die in the attempt.?

- The Winds of Winter

You?re right in that the theme of obsession is one that runs strongly in Stannis? arc - both in the show and the TV. However whereas for book!Stannis that obsession manifests itself as a zealous, overbearing pursuit of justice and the law (as well as certain hypocrisies along the way), show!Stannis seems to be characterised by the showrunners as an obsession with power for power?s sake.

?Anything is permissible because really its just that all means justify the proper end and the proper end is Stannis sitting on the throne. So it is a very good question if it is so much that he really wants to be king because he has always had this massive desire to rule the Seven Kingdoms and you never really hear about what he wants to do for the people of Westeros. It?s not about his vision for what a king could be. It?s just, it?s mine, this is my right.?

- David Benioff

That quote tells you everything you need to know about DnD?s approach to the character. They operate from the angle that Stannis is a man driven by a long-held desire to hold the same power Robert had. This isn?t the case in the text. GRRM?s Stannis is, if anything, incredibly bitter about the burden placed on his shoulders. Prior to the War of the Five Kings, his ambitions and desires amounted to no more than Storm?s End; and even that desire was rooted in the fact that, by legal right, it should have been his anyway. He seems far more caught up in the injustice that he was passed over not because he loves to rule, but because Robert didn?t play by the rules of the land.

The act is also stupidly illogical, from an in-universe standpoint. Stannis just burned the sole heir to House Baratheon, extinguishing the dynasty he is oh-so-obsessed with establishing.

The show and the books are two separate beasts of course, but there?s no denying the sour feeling that comes with seeing your favourite character?s adaptation be cut to shreds because Episode 9 demands shock value. Shireen may well be (i.e. probably is) doomed in the books too, but it?ll be a long night in the seven hells before I believe book!Stannis will countenance her fate.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Tyrion is probably the strongest example of this, he's been whitewashed so effectively at this point virtually nothing of his book personality is left.

I can agree with that to an extent.

Tyrion is a character who I think has been smothered under his own popularity with the fans, partly because Peter Dinklage has "arrived" since he started doing GoT. As a result, I think they've played it way too safe with him lately, and his character is basically getting boiled down to his most simplistically anachronistic elements (don't get me wrong, he is a huge anachronism in the books too). I have to confess I've lost a lot of interest in his story at this point, but then I think GRRM should have just had the balls to write him out already. At this point, he's just milling around waiting for a new arc to start, and I speak for both the books and the show there.

They've just done such a horrible job establishing the Azor Ahai storyline, the prophecy of the Long Night and the war against the darkness, and Stannis's utter commitment to duty that the character comes off as easily duped/changeable.

Again, I can agree with this. I have friends who just watch the show, and that's certainly how it came off to them. Even just having Meli tell Stannis the story of the forging of lightbringer in the course of persuading him would have taken.. 2 minutes of screentime and yet made it all so much more comprehensible.

The whole conversation between Stannis and Shireen about choice, which I actually thought was powerful, seems like it kind of relied on having that information which wasn't there. So yeah, I agree to an extent it's baffling that it wasn't included. At the same time though, I don't think it's necessary, and could have come across extremely badly, to attempt to make the decision sympathetic.

Like last night's extended "Meryn Trant is a pedophile because we never miss an opportunity for some squick" sequence.

Hey, I liked that scene!

Honestly, I feel like I seem to have read it totally differently. All I saw was "we are establishing a way for Arya to get close enough to Trant to kill him in a stupid act of personal revenge". I never got the "eeewww! Paedos!" element. I mean, let's be honest, there's a lot of implied fucking (consensual and otherwise) of people who would definately be children by our standards in the books, and yet I don't see this allegation of needless squick being made by anyone who isn't more generally interested in the representation of sexual violence in media.

 

[Grahav]

Hey, I liked that scene!

Honestly, I feel like I seem to have read it totally differently. All I saw was "we are establishing a way for Arya to get close enough to Trant to kill him in a stupid act of personal revenge". I never got the "eeewww! Paedos!" element. I mean, let's be honest, there's a lot of implied fucking (consensual and otherwise) of people who would definately be children by our standards in the books, and yet I don't see this allegation of needless squick being made by anyone who isn't more generally interested in the representation of sexual violence in media.

To me seemed they really wanted to make Arya really heroic by making her victim completely unsympathetic instead of showing the psychological toll of entering a cult of assassins and discussing the ethical and moral aspects of murder.

The message is: "Murder is cool when girls do it."

It is like a fucking shounen manga.