ASoIAF/Game of Thrones general Discussion Thread

[New Frenco Empire]

Westeros minus Dorne* which only Nymeria could conquer.

Well Daeron did, but they broke free after his death.

After they killed him, yes.

Like I said, Dorne = basically untouchable.

[The Jonathanian States]

I understand that some people think Robb Stark is overly hyped for being a fan-favourite, but he's definitely a better commander than some on the list.
Namely, Robert, Victarion, Eddard and even Tywin and Aegon.
Tywin has virtually no battles to show how he's a great commander. Aegons conquest was mostly due to Balerion, Meraxes and Vhagar.

Except conquering Westeros isn't easy at all, even with three rape cannons.

Logistics, pacification, governance, etc. Being a tactician would be easy in Aegon's situation. Being a strategist, however, would be a nightmare only someone as competent as The Conqueror could put up with.

Not really. Following a Feudal order, and by leaving the local lords in most places (Westerlands, North, Vale, Crownlands), by merely changing the status of a local non-ruling house (Riverlands and Reach), or by letting the locals even elect their own new overlords (Iron Islands), he merely has to deal with the Lords Paramount and the Crownlands. And the Lords Paramount and Crownlander Lords, fully aware of his dragons since the Field of Fire, are loyal to him for their own safety's sake. That's why there could've been nothing aong the lines of Robert's Rebellion during Aegon's days - not because of his competence, but dragons.

Now, logistics I discussed in an earlier post.

EDIT: For a missing comma that annoyed me.

[Infected Mushroom]

Without spoiling anything, does the plot get better or worse after the end of season 4?

Should I keep watching?

As a diehard ASoIaF fan, it only gets better.

Though, the show is diverging from the books a bit, so I can't say how S5 will be when it comes out in a year. It'll be cool to see Dorne, though.

=)

[New Frenco Empire]

Except conquering Westeros isn't easy at all, even with three rape cannons.

Logistics, pacification, governance, etc. Being a tactician would be easy in Aegon's situation. Being a strategist, however, would be a nightmare only someone as competent as The Conqueror could put up with.

Not really. Following a Feudal order, and by leaving the local lords in most places (Westerlands, North, Vale, Crownlands), by merely changing the status of a local non-ruling house (Riverlands and Reach), or by letting the locals even elect their own new overlords (Iron Islands), he merely has to deal with the Lords Paramount and the Crownlands. And the Lords Paramount and Crownlander Lords, fully aware of his dragons since the Field of Fire, are loyal to him for their own safety's sake. That's why there could've been nothing aong the lines of Robert's Rebellion during Aegon's days - not because of his competence, but dragons.

Now, logistics I discussed in an earlier post.

EDIT: For a missing comma that annoyed me.

False. The Faith rebelled right after Aegon's death, and they actually enjoyed some success in it. Why would they rebel under the weak king Aenys or the cruel king Maegor and not Aegon? The dragons were still around and breeding. Were they not scared of them, as you claim? Seriously, the dragons were undoubtedly instrumental in his conquest, but let's get real. Dragons are not invincible, and they generally hold very little sway against foes that generally hate their riders. Dorne is a good example.

And you act as though it's easy to secure loyalty while simultaneously taking crowns away. It's not the same as Robert's Rebellion. Most of his allies were from marriages to friends, and he didn't have to tell the others he swayed to his side that he would be taking away their kingdoms. Dragons played a part in that, yes, but like I said: he was a calculating genius who knew how to pacify people afterwards. He wasn't so lucky with Dorne, but the other kingdoms could have easily done it. Especially the Vale and the North.

Where did you address logistics?

I really don't understand this. When I try and argue for Daenerys, I have to deal with people underestimating her dragons. With Aegon, people overestimate his. One of them died, ffs. Barring the size and maturity of the dragons, consistency would be nice.

[Bralia]

Without spoiling anything, does the plot get better or worse after the end of season 4?

Should I keep watching?

As a diehard ASoIaF fan, it only gets better.

Though, the show is diverging from the books a bit, so I can't say how S5 will be when it comes out in a year. It'll be cool to see Dorne, though.

I wonder, which Spanish cities would make a good fit for Dorne . . . ?

[New Aerios]

As a diehard ASoIaF fan, it only gets better.

Though, the show is diverging from the books a bit, so I can't say how S5 will be when it comes out in a year. It'll be cool to see Dorne, though.

I wonder, which Spanish cities would make a good fit for Dorne . . . ?

I'm thinking Toledo might be a good choice. Having said that, quite a lot of fan art seems to place Dorne as more Arabian than Spanish in terms of architecture. So maybe Andalusia, or somewhere else that was conquered by the Moors.

[Eaglleia]

I wonder, which Spanish cities would make a good fit for Dorne . . . ?

I'm thinking Toledo might be a good choice. Having said that, quite a lot of fan art seems to place Dorne as more Arabian than Spanish in terms of architecture. So maybe Andalusia, or somewhere else that was conquered by the Moors.

Most fans actually assumed (including myself) that the Dornish were more Middle-Eastern/Indian-esque than Mediterranean/Iberian. Derp. I understand that old Granadan fortresses will be used.

[The Jonathanian States]

Not really. Following a Feudal order, and by leaving the local lords in most places (Westerlands, North, Vale, Crownlands), by merely changing the status of a local non-ruling house (Riverlands and Reach), or by letting the locals even elect their own new overlords (Iron Islands), he merely has to deal with the Lords Paramount and the Crownlands. And the Lords Paramount and Crownlander Lords, fully aware of his dragons since the Field of Fire, are loyal to him for their own safety's sake. That's why there could've been nothing aong the lines of Robert's Rebellion during Aegon's days - not because of his competence, but dragons.

Now, logistics I discussed in an earlier post.

EDIT: For a missing comma that annoyed me.

False. The Faith rebelled right after Aegon's death, and they actually enjoyed some success in it. Why would they rebel under the weak king Aenys or the cruel king Maegor and not Aegon? The dragons were still around and breeding. Were they not scared of them, as you claim? Seriously, the dragons were undoubtedly instrumental in his conquest, but let's get real. Dragons are not invincible, and they generally hold very little sway against foes that generally hate their riders. Dorne is a good example.

And you act as though it's easy to secure loyalty while simultaneously taking crowns away. It's not the same as Robert's Rebellion. Most of his allies were from marriages to friends, and he didn't have to tell the others he swayed to his side that he would be taking away their kingdoms. Dragons played a part in that, yes, but like I said: he was a calculating genius who knew how to pacify people afterwards. He wasn't so lucky with Dorne, but the other kingdoms could have easily done it. Especially the Vale and the North.

Where did you address logistics?

I really don't understand this. When I try and argue for Daenerys, I have to deal with people underestimating her dragons. With Aegon, people overestimate his. One of them died, ffs. Barring the size and maturity of the dragons, consistency would be nice.

I'll be honest and say that while I remember that the Faith rebelled sometime, I didn't know/remember that it was quite then, and also lack knowledge on the context of the Faith's Rebellion, so I'll have to read up on that. And then give you a proper reply for this part.

Crowns which were a mere title. IIRC Aegon had no later wars to fight, so no troops had to be provided. He left the Lord Paramounts ruling over what previously would have been their Kingdom. They basically were autonomous.
No, it's not easy to secure loyalty while taking crowns away, as dismissible as they may be, but the threat of being burned by huge dragons probably can let people oversee such a slight to their honor and instead be practical.
I'll be fully open with you here, and say that if there is some proof or record of him actively pacifying the nobility in an calculating and genius way, I'll gladly retract my statement on the dragons having done all of it. He wasn't lucky with pacifying Dorne because he didn't fully conquer it. Also, I don't get your last part here "The other Kingdom's could have easily done it". Do you mean that those Kingdoms could have resisted him? Or Could have conquested the 7 Kingdoms?
If it's the former: On the North: I actually saw an interesting discussion about that in the forums attached to the wiki. There've been speculations on the performance of Dragons in (the northern) winter, as we don't have too many details on the Queen's visit to the wall, and because she came peacefully. Though usually it is agreed that with the North being mostly open lands, it would've been impossible to pull off a Dorne for longer than one winter, and even that only if Aegon would turn North in winter/early autumn. On the Vale: It probably could have, only that it was captured in what basically was a hostage-situation with the King and his Queen Regent.

Me talking about logistics, a post to which I actually didn't get an answer, as I just noticed:

You seem to be under the impression that dragons cheapen Aegon's skill. That's . . . not right. Think of it this way: Dragons are just another asset that can be compared to other uses of combat exceptionalism. Dragons are to Aegon what horses are to the Dothraki. They are comparable to what Grey Wind, the direwolf, was to Robb Stark. Or even in a more abstract way, the desert to the Dornishmen. And then there's wildfire. If there was ever a force truly comparable to dragons, it's wildfire. None of these exceptional pieces of combat can win a war without tactics and strategy.

And on that note, do you have any idea how large Westeros is? Yeah, I know, it's crazy. What Aegon did to Westeros is on the same scale of conquest as the Roman Empire. Napoleonic, even. You need a mastermind of logistics to invade a territory of such size. To control a territory of that size. A military commander doesn't just plan for how to take cities, but to hold them as well. Dragons can't do that. There is truly no better commander than Aegon the Conqueror.

Grey wind wasn't what made Walder grant him passage, wasn't what brought him to the west, and wasn't alone in winning the Whispering Wood. The Dothraki horse...... yes, that description seems to be better. Without it they can fight, though cannot be expected to reach their usual quote of victories. Without Tactics and strategy? No, I agree. Though are masterful strategy and tactics required when everything you do falls back to doing on one single thing - letting hell loose on them with dragonfire - or the thread of doing it?

Good Point. Though IIRC he never went to the Iron Islands or to the North. So we can chop that off, reducing westeros by half-ish(?). Then, there's at least one Kingdom that was defeated only by Dragons. The Vale was Visenya on Vhagar, not much logistics there. (Yes, there was the invasion leading up to the battle of Gulltown, but it ended in a draw, and would've been a failure without the dragon, so it's not an example of successful planning). So we can chop that part off as well. Rosby and Stokeworth, back at the beginning, also were only the sisters. Dorne failed, and with the logistics there turned into impossible by the dornish, it hardly is a logistical success.
So we have the Storm and Crownlands, the Wester and Riverlands, and the Reach, right? Well, the rebelling Riverlanders marched their army towards Harrenhal when he was there. Later he would march south to what would become known as the Field of Fire, in the northern Reach. The Westerlands never saw him, so they can be taken off as well. So, the Field of Fire was in the northern reach, and after it he headed north again, to the trident, with the "Inn of the kneeling man" being on one of the forks roughly halfway between Riverrun and Fairmarket. After that he headed to Oldtown. Though we have to consider A) That at times the areas had surrendered to him already, meaning that logistics would happen on them, as with his march down to Oldtown, or his march north towards Torrhen. B) The troop number was changing. At the Field of Fire all he had was 11,000. According to this, which I found on the wiki page on the conquest, when Torrhen marched south, he had 45,000. Unlike both of those, when he landed he is mentioned as having less than 3000 there, while the wiki even gives less than 1600.
3)Roman Empire..... in terms of area, maybe. Though in terms of troops it is far. During the Great Illyrian Revolt (6 AD, so not that far from the first formation of the empire) 10 Legions and an equivalent amount of Auxilia were deployed, with each Legion being 5,120. That's 102,400 including the Auxilia. Then there was a loca Roman Ally supplying roughly that amount again. 200,000. That definitely is more than Aegon ever is mentioned having in the conquest. Or if its battles you prefer: Let's take the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest. Between 20,000 and 36,000 thousand romans marched there. 3 Legions, double amount of Auxilia cohorts and the same amount of Cavalry Alae. That's less than Aegon. But that also happened at the same time as the above-mentioned campaign, so there's that.
4)Napoleonic, you say. 2,500,000 Casualties. Only in the Military, with an additional 1,000,000 civilians. Other estimates give 5,000,000 including civilians. Somebody else gave between 5,000,000 and 7,000,000 as total casualties. One estimate gives 1.4 french military deaths.
And this always only is deaths. Those who survived the militaries of those days are probably a lot more.
4+3) The area might be on the scale fought on by the French or Roman Empire, but Aegon's forces never came to those sizes.
5) Now, don't understand me wrong, he may have been a good commander. All I'm saying is that he isn't, purely due to that conquest, a supremely excellent commander. He may have been, but the conquest would be no proof of it - That's my claim and position.

Also, I don't think I am amongst those that underestimate Dany's Dragon.

[Priory Academy USSR]

How is Tywin Lannister getting so many votes? He wins no notable battles,

except for the Blackwater-

where the legwork of his success was achieved by Tyrion and pretty much anyone could have done what Tywin did.

Cautionary spoiler, although I assume everyone's read/seen it by now.

[The Huskar Social Union]

How is Tywin Lannister getting so many votes? He wins no notable battles,

except for the Blackwater-

where the legwork of his success was achieved by Tyrion and pretty much anyone could have done what Tywin did.

Cautionary spoiler, although I assume everyone's read/seen it by now.

Yeah blackwater is clear, spoilers now only apply to season 4. Also i agree. Im surprised Stannis has not got more votes. He has got one of the best records. (obviously i will sound biased here because i am a big fan of his buts it true)

He held Storms End against a far larger force for a year whilst he and his men starved to death and then went on to launch an incredibly risky naval assault on an island fortress (dragonstone) and won. He Smashed the Greyjoys (who are some of the best naval fighters) at fair isle and captured the largest island in the Iron Islands in another amphibious assault.

The only reason he lost at Blackwater was because of Tywin and the Tyrells, even with the wildfire and the chain which destroyed a large portion of his navy he still had enough men to capture the city and win which he would have if Tywin did not show up because the defenders were being slaughtered and some were running by this stage.

Then at the wall he flanks a far larger force of 100k and hits it in the centre with three massive pincer formations of Cavalry breaking their spirit and capturing the Wildling King, Mance Rayder.

And as i mentioned before a couple of pages back, with the things going the way they are he is practically guaranteed to win at Winterfell

[New Aerios]

How is Tywin Lannister getting so many votes? He wins no notable battles,

except for the Blackwater-

where the legwork of his success was achieved by Tyrion and pretty much anyone could have done what Tywin did.

Cautionary spoiler, although I assume everyone's read/seen it by now.

Well, when you add the victory at the Blackwater to completely destroying House Tarbeck and House Reyne and masterminding the Red Wedding, I'd say he's pretty good.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and he captured King's Landing.

[The Huskar Social Union]

How is Tywin Lannister getting so many votes? He wins no notable battles,

except for the Blackwater-

where the legwork of his success was achieved by Tyrion and pretty much anyone could have done what Tywin did.

Cautionary spoiler, although I assume everyone's read/seen it by now.

Well, when you add the victory at the Blackwater to completely destroying House Tarbeck and House Reyne and masterminding the Red Wedding, I'd say he's pretty good.

Oh yeah forgot about these victories.

[New Frenco Empire]

How is Tywin Lannister getting so many votes? He wins no notable battles,

except for the Blackwater-

where the legwork of his success was achieved by Tyrion and pretty much anyone could have done what Tywin did.

Cautionary spoiler, although I assume everyone's read/seen it by now.

The same reason Aegon should be at the top. Strategy.

He may be a decent tactician at best, but he's a strategist of brilliant sorts. Barring the fact that he destroyed Reyne and Tarbeck in his youth, he used deception to win (or, at least, greatly shorten) Robert's Rebellion, masterminded the Red Wedding, etc. Say what you want about the man (I am personally disgusted by him), he knows how to win a war. Or, at least, knows how to make his house profit from it.

[Delmonte]

Alright, first I want to say: Robb Stark? Best military commander? Seriously?

Robb is completely at fault for Edmure battling Tywin's force at the fords and allowing them time to receive the message that they were being cut off. He told Edmure to "hold Riverrun". He didn't tell Edmure that he couldn't exceed that. Robb had literally zero reason to not let Edmure in on the plan. The fact that GRRM tries to somehow pin this on Edmure is always BAFFLING to me. It was just like, why would Robb ever not tell Edmure the plan or at LEAST not be so vague, like say something such as "Hold Riverrun, but don't leave the castle. Let them come to you."? Horrible, horrible strategic decision that's completely irredeemable. Essentially, neither consulting nor informing your NCO's with regards to your plan. Which is just arrogance and idiocy and can get you fucking discharged from most modern militaries.

Robb used clever gambits, such as sending a diversionary force, and he got lucky at Lannisport. He also had superior cavalry, etc. etc. None of Robb's success had to do with his military mind which makes total sense as he has, by our knowledge, next to no military training classical or otherwise.

Randyll Tarly, Randyll Tarly, Randyll Tarly. Randyll Tarly has the most battle experience of anyone alive, the most experience leading field armies of the greatest numbers, and the only education that can be referred to as a classical military training. He also defeated a very large force with a relatively small force against Robert Baratheon. Remember, he kicked the ass of a large part of Robert's army with just the VANGUARD of his army. The arguments in favor of Stannis hold a bit of water, but aside from that nobody can even come close. To say anyone but Randyll Tarly is the greatest commander in Westeros almost verges on being intellectually dishonest, in my mind.

Now, I do want to talk about my theories with regards to what will happen and who will be king.

Alright. So I subscribe to the Grander Grand Tyrell Conspiracy which basically says, based of off IC and OOC reasons, it seems like the Tyrells are really not what they appear to be. The book seems to want us to believe that they are disloyal, but their historical conduct demonstrates otherwise. By and large, they have picked a side and stuck with it. Which makes their conduct with Renly/Stannis/Tywin really, really weird. It's just not like what they've done before.

I'm going to copy and paste the arguments of someone who puts it better than I:

-People oft forget, but the Tyrells were Targaryen loyalists. They were given their land by the Targaryens in exchange for the Tyrells supporting their initial invasion of Westeros. Mace Tyrell, along with his bannermen, not only fought for the Targaryens in Robert's Rebellion, but they fought well. Now, the books make it clear that Mace Tyrell is no great strategic mind, but it is clear that he's very good at surrounding himself with people who compensate for his deficiencies. Randyll Tarly is often called the greatest commander in Westeros and principally leads Tyrell's armies.

-After the Tyrells' victory against Robert's army, they made a strategic blunder that makes absolutely no sense. They went to lay siege to Storm's End instead of going to King's Landing. More on this later.

-Olenna is a Redwyne.

-Mace married a Hightower upon the insistence of Olenna.

-Olenna is demonstrated numerous times to be absolutely brilliant at just about everything. To demonstrate this, she outsmarted Tyrion (the most conniving POV character and one of the most conniving characters in general), Tywin (the book's token badass), Cersei, and Kevan Lannister (who, if not amazing, is at least competent) while they were all in the same room.


Okay, so I'm going to explain the theory of what happened exactly in chronological order and then go back and explain why I think thusly in logical order. Chronologically, I believe that this is what happened: (Replace "Tyrells" with "Olenna" wherever possible)

1: Robert rebelled.
2: The Tyrells genuinely thought that they were going to win (they thought that they had themselves, Lannister, and Dorne fighting for the Targaryens) | Varys/Illyrio saw this as an opportunity to instate a "good" ruler in Westeros.
3: The Tyrells get wind of Lannister treachery. Informing Aerys would limit their ability in the future to submit to the rebels who, in all honesty, would probably win anyway with the Lannisters on their side. So instead of informing Aerys, they enact a grand plan.
4: The Tyrells arrange for the baby Aegon to be spirited away. They keep him with their army to protect him, but leave no switchling in his place.
5: Varys goes to do the same exact thing only to find that he was beaten to it. So he cuts his losses and switches someone in to substitute for Aegon so that everyone will think he is dead (the opposite of what the Tyrells wanted; they wanted people to think he was alive so that Robert would have less legitimacy).
6: The Tyrells win the Battle of Ashford.
7: The Tyrells lay siege to Storm's End purely as a cover in order to evacuate Aegon to the Summer Isles. They do not care what happens to Viserys or Daenarys (whom they don't even know exists yet) because A) According to Targaryen succession law, the son of the first son comes before the second son and B) They think that everyone will soon find out that Aegon is missing and Viserys and Daenarys would be irrelevant.
8: Having conveyed Aegon to safety, the Tyrells surrender the second that it seems logical.
9: The Tyrells find out that someone switched in a replacement for Aegon and decide to bide their time and play close to their chest.
10: Robert dies. The Tyrells were not expecting to have to put their plan into action so quickly, which is why Olenna takes so long to mosey on down to King's Landing: She's busy executing decades' worth of planning and intrigue.
11: The Tyrells start buying time and sowing disarray to make the land ripe for the claiming once Aegon returns. The Greyjoy invasion temporarily stops them from fetching Aegon. In this part of Olenna's strategy, she uses Loras and Margaery like pawns. She supports Renly's rebellion in order to keep the Lannisters from consolidating and crushing the Starks. At no time did she ever intend to see Renly be king. In fact, I think that had Stannis not killed Renly, she would have. Olenna is trying to systematically remove anyone who could possibly challenge Aegon's claim to the throne. She orchestrates Joffrey's murder and Margaery's marriage to Tommen; planning to see him dead as well.
12: Loras goes to Dragonstone nominally to lay siege to it, but in reality he fakes his maiming by some means and goes off to link up with Aegon and, presumably, acquire or bring some sort of proof that he is the real Aegon.


So that brings us more or less up to speed. So there are several conspiracy theories that are encompassed by this, namely the "Young Griff is not Aegon" theory. I personally subscribe to the belief that he's a descendant of the Blackfyres and that's why he looks Targaryen. I think that Olenna's marrying Mace to a Hightower was significant: Maesters are not incorruptible. Pycelle is the highest Maester in the land and is incredibly corrupt. I believe Olenna has been using her Hightower connections to plant Maesters in strategic places. This isn't necessary for the theory to work, but would help explain how everything runs smoothly.

Does anyone actually believe that Cersei tricked Loras into going to Dragonstone and risking his own life? Are we being serious? First of all, that would require Cersei (who is chronically incompetent) to pull one over on Olenna. Second, Loras is a tourney knight. Leading a siege isn't glamorous and you can forget about charging into boiling oil. That's just not him. He doesn't do heroics.

Olenna is essentially using Tyrell's heirs and armies to keep everything destabilized while her own armies see very little action. Let's be real: The Starks are nonexistant, the Tully armies are either dead or surrounded, the Arryn armies are in-fighting, the Lannisters have exhausted themselves against the Starks and Tullies, and Greyjoy has lost a ruler and has been stymied. And the Baratheon men are all either dead or off fighting giants. Meanwhile the Tyrells have an army that is well-fed and numbering somewhere around eighty-thousand men conservatively. The only real body left for them to deal with is Dorne, which only has ten thousand spears at last count. I think that what will wind up happening is the Tyrells fighting Dorne+Young Griff+ Maybe Daenarys and even then they'll give them a run for their money, but Daenarys and Young Griff will eventually win, marry, and rule or Stannis will surprise us all and become king (if we're being honest, his character arc is headed in the right direction).

To the end of getting rid of heirs, do we really believe that Olenna off'd Joffrey because she thought he'd beat Margaery? Seriously? Margaery is the series' black widow. Olenna is using her to get close to possible heirs and summarily kill them. It makes literally no sense that Olenna would give up Margaery's being Queen unless she thought that they could do better, i.e. have someone that they have been raising since he was a baby be king AND have Margaery be Queen.

I think Stannis will be King. What we originally saw was that Daenarys didn't want anything to do with Westeros and she was going to be an unwilling Queen. Now she thinks that she deserves it. So her character arc is headed in the exact wrong direction. Meanwhile, Stannis' character arc is headed in the right direction. Basically Stannis began the fight for his being King with the impression that he should be King because that's what's right and that's how it should be. Not necessarily that he deserved it or really wanted it, but it was just how it should be. Now he's done a one-eighty and instead of saying he should be king because that's the law, he's doing things that a good king would do. When the Wall called for help he was the only one that answered. GRRM is demonstrating that Stannis would make a commendable ruler.

[Eaglleia]

Alright, first I want to say: Robb Stark? Best military commander? Seriously?

Randyll Tarly, Randyll Tarly, Randyll Tarly. Randyll Tarly has the most battle experience of anyone alive, the most experience leading field armies of the greatest numbers, and the only education that can be referred to as a classical military training. He also defeated a very large force with a relatively small force against Robert Baratheon. Remember, he kicked the ass of a large part of Robert's army with just the VANGUARD of his army. The arguments in favor of Stannis hold a bit of water, but aside from that nobody can even come close. To say anyone but Randyll Tarly is the greatest commander in Westeros almost verges on being intellectually dishonest, in my mind.

Source? He has one battle to his name, and that's the one where he beat Robert, and it is nowhere stated that his force was considerably smaller, in fact, it is stated that Tarly had the larger force. At the Battle of Blackwater, he was hardly entirely responsible for it's victory.

I think Stannis will be King. What we originally saw was that Daenarys didn't want anything to do with Westeros and she was going to be an unwilling Queen. Now she thinks that she deserves it. So her character arc is headed in the exact wrong direction. Meanwhile, Stannis' character arc is headed in the right direction. Basically Stannis began the fight for his being King with the impression that he should be King because that's what's right and that's how it should be. Not necessarily that he deserved it or really wanted it, but it was just how it should be. Now he's done a one-eighty and instead of saying he should be king because that's the law, he's doing things that a good king would do. When the Wall called for help he was the only one that answered. GRRM is demonstrating that Stannis would make a commendable ruler.

I must agree on this. Daenarys has become increasingly dis-likable to me as the books went on, while Stannis became more and more likable.

[Delmonte]

Alright, first I want to say: Robb Stark? Best military commander? Seriously?

Randyll Tarly, Randyll Tarly, Randyll Tarly. Randyll Tarly has the most battle experience of anyone alive, the most experience leading field armies of the greatest numbers, and the only education that can be referred to as a classical military training. He also defeated a very large force with a relatively small force against Robert Baratheon. Remember, he kicked the ass of a large part of Robert's army with just the VANGUARD of his army. The arguments in favor of Stannis hold a bit of water, but aside from that nobody can even come close. To say anyone but Randyll Tarly is the greatest commander in Westeros almost verges on being intellectually dishonest, in my mind.

Source? He has one battle to his name, and that's the one where he beat Robert, and it is nowhere stated that his force was considerably smaller, in fact, it is stated that Tarly had the larger force. At the Battle of Blackwater, he was hardly entirely responsible for it's victory.

Uh! Read: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Battle_of_Ashford It was just the VANGUARD of the Tyrell army that defeated Robert's army.

Anyway, he was at Blackwater. Arguing he wasn't at least in part responsible is unreasonable. In any event, there's six people that had a lot of experience with fighting and leading large armies:

Robert Baratheon
Jon Arryn
Hoster Tully
Tywin Lannister
Eddard Stark
Randyll Tarly

Which of those are still alive?

I think Stannis will be King. What we originally saw was that Daenarys didn't want anything to do with Westeros and she was going to be an unwilling Queen. Now she thinks that she deserves it. So her character arc is headed in the exact wrong direction. Meanwhile, Stannis' character arc is headed in the right direction. Basically Stannis began the fight for his being King with the impression that he should be King because that's what's right and that's how it should be. Not necessarily that he deserved it or really wanted it, but it was just how it should be. Now he's done a one-eighty and instead of saying he should be king because that's the law, he's doing things that a good king would do. When the Wall called for help he was the only one that answered. GRRM is demonstrating that Stannis would make a commendable ruler.

I must agree on this. Daenarys has become increasingly dis-likable to me as the books went on, while Stannis became more and more likable.

[Eaglleia]

Source? He has one battle to his name, and that's the one where he beat Robert, and it is nowhere stated that his force was considerably smaller, in fact, it is stated that Tarly had the larger force. At the Battle of Blackwater, he was hardly entirely responsible for it's victory.

Uh! Read: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Battle_of_Ashford It was just the VANGUARD of the Tyrell army that defeated Robert's army.

Anyway, he was at Blackwater. Arguing he wasn't at least in part responsible is unreasonable. In any event, there's six people that had a lot of experience with fighting and leading large armies:

Robert Baratheon
Jon Arryn
Hoster Tully
Tywin Lannister
Eddard Stark
Randyll Tarly

Which of those are still alive?

Fair enough. However, it is said to be a small battle anyway, so it's likely Roberts force was considerably small as well. I didn't say that, but any competent commander would have been able to replace him at Blackwater, it's not exactly a hard fight.

That comparison establishes absolutely nothing. Not a single one of the others died in battle.

And you should spoiler that.

[The Jonathanian States]

How is Tywin Lannister getting so many votes? He wins no notable battles,

except for the Blackwater-

where the legwork of his success was achieved by Tyrion and pretty much anyone could have done what Tywin did.

Cautionary spoiler, although I assume everyone's read/seen it by now.

The same reason Aegon should be at the top. Strategy.

He may be a decent tactician at best, but he's a strategist of brilliant sorts. Barring the fact that he destroyed Reyne and Tarbeck in his youth, he used deception to win (or, at least, greatly shorten) Robert's Rebellion, masterminded the Red Wedding, etc. Say what you want about the man (I am personally disgusted by him), he knows how to win a war. Or, at least, knows how to make his house profit from it.

But that's not military strategy.
I wanted to add that to my earlier post above him, though forgot - so I'll mention this here:
Pacifying regions is not a sign of Military Command. Aegon shouldn't win this poll based on how he pacified Westeros. I'd dispute that he deserves to be there for the conquest (due to the dragons), but voting for him on the conquest at least makes sense.
Now, again, I do believe that given Dragons for life (that means knowledge of how to use them, the ability to do so, the actual dragons, etc) almost everybody on the list would be able to achieve the conquest. And everything after that is more diplomacy and intrigue than military.

How is Tywin Lannister getting so many votes? He wins no notable battles,

except for the Blackwater-

where the legwork of his success was achieved by Tyrion and pretty much anyone could have done what Tywin did.

Cautionary spoiler, although I assume everyone's read/seen it by now.

Exactly. He's a good overall Strategist, though his victories are mostly by intrigue and diplomacy, not military. Except for the Castameres and Tarbecks, but those really don't deserve count.

EDIT:
I mean, the poll asks for the best military commander.

[Priory Academy USSR]

How is Tywin Lannister getting so many votes? He wins no notable battles,

except for the Blackwater-

where the legwork of his success was achieved by Tyrion and pretty much anyone could have done what Tywin did.

Cautionary spoiler, although I assume everyone's read/seen it by now.

The same reason Aegon should be at the top. Strategy.

He may be a decent tactician at best, but he's a strategist of brilliant sorts. Barring the fact that he destroyed Reyne and Tarbeck in his youth, he used deception to win (or, at least, greatly shorten) Robert's Rebellion, masterminded the Red Wedding, etc. Say what you want about the man (I am personally disgusted by him), he knows how to win a war. Or, at least, knows how to make his house profit from it.

Those types of deception does not equal military brilliance-otherwise, Walder Frey would be at the top of this list. I don't disagree that Tywin is possibly the most skilled at winning wars and generally excelling, but that is due to his diplomatic ability and underhanded deals, not his ability as a military commander as the poll question asks.

[United Marxist Nations]

Alright, first I want to say: Robb Stark? Best military commander? Seriously?

Robb is completely at fault for Edmure battling Tywin's force at the fords and allowing them time to receive the message that they were being cut off. He told Edmure to "hold Riverrun". He didn't tell Edmure that he couldn't exceed that. Robb had literally zero reason to not let Edmure in on the plan. The fact that GRRM tries to somehow pin this on Edmure is always BAFFLING to me. It was just like, why would Robb ever not tell Edmure the plan or at LEAST not be so vague, like say something such as "Hold Riverrun, but don't leave the castle. Let them come to you."? Horrible, horrible strategic decision that's completely irredeemable. Essentially, neither consulting nor informing your NCO's with regards to your plan. Which is just arrogance and idiocy and can get you fucking discharged from most modern militaries.

Robb used clever gambits, such as sending a diversionary force, and he got lucky at Lannisport. He also had superior cavalry, etc. etc. None of Robb's success had to do with his military mind which makes total sense as he has, by our knowledge, next to no military training classical or otherwise.

Randyll Tarly, Randyll Tarly, Randyll Tarly. Randyll Tarly has the most battle experience of anyone alive, the most experience leading field armies of the greatest numbers, and the only education that can be referred to as a classical military training. He also defeated a very large force with a relatively small force against Robert Baratheon. Remember, he kicked the ass of a large part of Robert's army with just the VANGUARD of his army. The arguments in favor of Stannis hold a bit of water, but aside from that nobody can even come close. To say anyone but Randyll Tarly is the greatest commander in Westeros almost verges on being intellectually dishonest, in my mind.

Now, I do want to talk about my theories with regards to what will happen and who will be king.

Alright. So I subscribe to the Grander Grand Tyrell Conspiracy which basically says, based of off IC and OOC reasons, it seems like the Tyrells are really not what they appear to be. The book seems to want us to believe that they are disloyal, but their historical conduct demonstrates otherwise. By and large, they have picked a side and stuck with it. Which makes their conduct with Renly/Stannis/Tywin really, really weird. It's just not like what they've done before.

I'm going to copy and paste the arguments of someone who puts it better than I:

-People oft forget, but the Tyrells were Targaryen loyalists. They were given their land by the Targaryens in exchange for the Tyrells supporting their initial invasion of Westeros. Mace Tyrell, along with his bannermen, not only fought for the Targaryens in Robert's Rebellion, but they fought well. Now, the books make it clear that Mace Tyrell is no great strategic mind, but it is clear that he's very good at surrounding himself with people who compensate for his deficiencies. Randyll Tarly is often called the greatest commander in Westeros and principally leads Tyrell's armies.

-After the Tyrells' victory against Robert's army, they made a strategic blunder that makes absolutely no sense. They went to lay siege to Storm's End instead of going to King's Landing. More on this later.

-Olenna is a Redwyne.

-Mace married a Hightower upon the insistence of Olenna.

-Olenna is demonstrated numerous times to be absolutely brilliant at just about everything. To demonstrate this, she outsmarted Tyrion (the most conniving POV character and one of the most conniving characters in general), Tywin (the book's token badass), Cersei, and Kevan Lannister (who, if not amazing, is at least competent) while they were all in the same room.


Okay, so I'm going to explain the theory of what happened exactly in chronological order and then go back and explain why I think thusly in logical order. Chronologically, I believe that this is what happened: (Replace "Tyrells" with "Olenna" wherever possible)

1: Robert rebelled.
2: The Tyrells genuinely thought that they were going to win (they thought that they had themselves, Lannister, and Dorne fighting for the Targaryens) | Varys/Illyrio saw this as an opportunity to instate a "good" ruler in Westeros.
3: The Tyrells get wind of Lannister treachery. Informing Aerys would limit their ability in the future to submit to the rebels who, in all honesty, would probably win anyway with the Lannisters on their side. So instead of informing Aerys, they enact a grand plan.
4: The Tyrells arrange for the baby Aegon to be spirited away. They keep him with their army to protect him, but leave no switchling in his place.
5: Varys goes to do the same exact thing only to find that he was beaten to it. So he cuts his losses and switches someone in to substitute for Aegon so that everyone will think he is dead (the opposite of what the Tyrells wanted; they wanted people to think he was alive so that Robert would have less legitimacy).
6: The Tyrells win the Battle of Ashford.
7: The Tyrells lay siege to Storm's End purely as a cover in order to evacuate Aegon to the Summer Isles. They do not care what happens to Viserys or Daenarys (whom they don't even know exists yet) because A) According to Targaryen succession law, the son of the first son comes before the second son and B) They think that everyone will soon find out that Aegon is missing and Viserys and Daenarys would be irrelevant.
8: Having conveyed Aegon to safety, the Tyrells surrender the second that it seems logical.
9: The Tyrells find out that someone switched in a replacement for Aegon and decide to bide their time and play close to their chest.
10: Robert dies. The Tyrells were not expecting to have to put their plan into action so quickly, which is why Olenna takes so long to mosey on down to King's Landing: She's busy executing decades' worth of planning and intrigue.
11: The Tyrells start buying time and sowing disarray to make the land ripe for the claiming once Aegon returns. The Greyjoy invasion temporarily stops them from fetching Aegon. In this part of Olenna's strategy, she uses Loras and Margaery like pawns. She supports Renly's rebellion in order to keep the Lannisters from consolidating and crushing the Starks. At no time did she ever intend to see Renly be king. In fact, I think that had Stannis not killed Renly, she would have. Olenna is trying to systematically remove anyone who could possibly challenge Aegon's claim to the throne. She orchestrates Joffrey's murder and Margaery's marriage to Tommen; planning to see him dead as well.
12: Loras goes to Dragonstone nominally to lay siege to it, but in reality he fakes his maiming by some means and goes off to link up with Aegon and, presumably, acquire or bring some sort of proof that he is the real Aegon.


So that brings us more or less up to speed. So there are several conspiracy theories that are encompassed by this, namely the "Young Griff is not Aegon" theory. I personally subscribe to the belief that he's a descendant of the Blackfyres and that's why he looks Targaryen. I think that Olenna's marrying Mace to a Hightower was significant: Maesters are not incorruptible. Pycelle is the highest Maester in the land and is incredibly corrupt. I believe Olenna has been using her Hightower connections to plant Maesters in strategic places. This isn't necessary for the theory to work, but would help explain how everything runs smoothly.

Does anyone actually believe that Cersei tricked Loras into going to Dragonstone and risking his own life? Are we being serious? First of all, that would require Cersei (who is chronically incompetent) to pull one over on Olenna. Second, Loras is a tourney knight. Leading a siege isn't glamorous and you can forget about charging into boiling oil. That's just not him. He doesn't do heroics.

Olenna is essentially using Tyrell's heirs and armies to keep everything destabilized while her own armies see very little action. Let's be real: The Starks are nonexistant, the Tully armies are either dead or surrounded, the Arryn armies are in-fighting, the Lannisters have exhausted themselves against the Starks and Tullies, and Greyjoy has lost a ruler and has been stymied. And the Baratheon men are all either dead or off fighting giants. Meanwhile the Tyrells have an army that is well-fed and numbering somewhere around eighty-thousand men conservatively. The only real body left for them to deal with is Dorne, which only has ten thousand spears at last count. I think that what will wind up happening is the Tyrells fighting Dorne+Young Griff+ Maybe Daenarys and even then they'll give them a run for their money, but Daenarys and Young Griff will eventually win, marry, and rule or Stannis will surprise us all and become king (if we're being honest, his character arc is headed in the right direction).

To the end of getting rid of heirs, do we really believe that Olenna off'd Joffrey because she thought he'd beat Margaery? Seriously? Margaery is the series' black widow. Olenna is using her to get close to possible heirs and summarily kill them. It makes literally no sense that Olenna would give up Margaery's being Queen unless she thought that they could do better, i.e. have someone that they have been raising since he was a baby be king AND have Margaery be Queen.

I think Stannis will be King. What we originally saw was that Daenarys didn't want anything to do with Westeros and she was going to be an unwilling Queen. Now she thinks that she deserves it. So her character arc is headed in the exact wrong direction. Meanwhile, Stannis' character arc is headed in the right direction. Basically Stannis began the fight for his being King with the impression that he should be King because that's what's right and that's how it should be. Not necessarily that he deserved it or really wanted it, but it was just how it should be. Now he's done a one-eighty and instead of saying he should be king because that's the law, he's doing things that a good king would do. When the Wall called for help he was the only one that answered. GRRM is demonstrating that Stannis would make a commendable ruler.

I've seen an interview with GRRM where he sort of says the same thing that you're saying: "Before, Stannis was trying to become king to save the realm, but now he's trying to save the realm to become king."

[The Huskar Social Union]

Alright, first I want to say: Robb Stark? Best military commander? Seriously?

Robb is completely at fault for Edmure battling Tywin's force at the fords and allowing them time to receive the message that they were being cut off. He told Edmure to "hold Riverrun". He didn't tell Edmure that he couldn't exceed that. Robb had literally zero reason to not let Edmure in on the plan. The fact that GRRM tries to somehow pin this on Edmure is always BAFFLING to me. It was just like, why would Robb ever not tell Edmure the plan or at LEAST not be so vague, like say something such as "Hold Riverrun, but don't leave the castle. Let them come to you."? Horrible, horrible strategic decision that's completely irredeemable. Essentially, neither consulting nor informing your NCO's with regards to your plan. Which is just arrogance and idiocy and can get you fucking discharged from most modern militaries.

Robb used clever gambits, such as sending a diversionary force, and he got lucky at Lannisport. He also had superior cavalry, etc. etc. None of Robb's success had to do with his military mind which makes total sense as he has, by our knowledge, next to no military training classical or otherwise.

Randyll Tarly, Randyll Tarly, Randyll Tarly. Randyll Tarly has the most battle experience of anyone alive, the most experience leading field armies of the greatest numbers, and the only education that can be referred to as a classical military training. He also defeated a very large force with a relatively small force against Robert Baratheon. Remember, he kicked the ass of a large part of Robert's army with just the VANGUARD of his army. The arguments in favor of Stannis hold a bit of water, but aside from that nobody can even come close. To say anyone but Randyll Tarly is the greatest commander in Westeros almost verges on being intellectually dishonest, in my mind.

Now, I do want to talk about my theories with regards to what will happen and who will be king.

Alright. So I subscribe to the Grander Grand Tyrell Conspiracy which basically says, based of off IC and OOC reasons, it seems like the Tyrells are really not what they appear to be. The book seems to want us to believe that they are disloyal, but their historical conduct demonstrates otherwise. By and large, they have picked a side and stuck with it. Which makes their conduct with Renly/Stannis/Tywin really, really weird. It's just not like what they've done before.

I'm going to copy and paste the arguments of someone who puts it better than I:

-People oft forget, but the Tyrells were Targaryen loyalists. They were given their land by the Targaryens in exchange for the Tyrells supporting their initial invasion of Westeros. Mace Tyrell, along with his bannermen, not only fought for the Targaryens in Robert's Rebellion, but they fought well. Now, the books make it clear that Mace Tyrell is no great strategic mind, but it is clear that he's very good at surrounding himself with people who compensate for his deficiencies. Randyll Tarly is often called the greatest commander in Westeros and principally leads Tyrell's armies.

-After the Tyrells' victory against Robert's army, they made a strategic blunder that makes absolutely no sense. They went to lay siege to Storm's End instead of going to King's Landing. More on this later.

-Olenna is a Redwyne.

-Mace married a Hightower upon the insistence of Olenna.

-Olenna is demonstrated numerous times to be absolutely brilliant at just about everything. To demonstrate this, she outsmarted Tyrion (the most conniving POV character and one of the most conniving characters in general), Tywin (the book's token badass), Cersei, and Kevan Lannister (who, if not amazing, is at least competent) while they were all in the same room.


Okay, so I'm going to explain the theory of what happened exactly in chronological order and then go back and explain why I think thusly in logical order. Chronologically, I believe that this is what happened: (Replace "Tyrells" with "Olenna" wherever possible)

1: Robert rebelled.
2: The Tyrells genuinely thought that they were going to win (they thought that they had themselves, Lannister, and Dorne fighting for the Targaryens) | Varys/Illyrio saw this as an opportunity to instate a "good" ruler in Westeros.
3: The Tyrells get wind of Lannister treachery. Informing Aerys would limit their ability in the future to submit to the rebels who, in all honesty, would probably win anyway with the Lannisters on their side. So instead of informing Aerys, they enact a grand plan.
4: The Tyrells arrange for the baby Aegon to be spirited away. They keep him with their army to protect him, but leave no switchling in his place.
5: Varys goes to do the same exact thing only to find that he was beaten to it. So he cuts his losses and switches someone in to substitute for Aegon so that everyone will think he is dead (the opposite of what the Tyrells wanted; they wanted people to think he was alive so that Robert would have less legitimacy).
6: The Tyrells win the Battle of Ashford.
7: The Tyrells lay siege to Storm's End purely as a cover in order to evacuate Aegon to the Summer Isles. They do not care what happens to Viserys or Daenarys (whom they don't even know exists yet) because A) According to Targaryen succession law, the son of the first son comes before the second son and B) They think that everyone will soon find out that Aegon is missing and Viserys and Daenarys would be irrelevant.
8: Having conveyed Aegon to safety, the Tyrells surrender the second that it seems logical.
9: The Tyrells find out that someone switched in a replacement for Aegon and decide to bide their time and play close to their chest.
10: Robert dies. The Tyrells were not expecting to have to put their plan into action so quickly, which is why Olenna takes so long to mosey on down to King's Landing: She's busy executing decades' worth of planning and intrigue.
11: The Tyrells start buying time and sowing disarray to make the land ripe for the claiming once Aegon returns. The Greyjoy invasion temporarily stops them from fetching Aegon. In this part of Olenna's strategy, she uses Loras and Margaery like pawns. She supports Renly's rebellion in order to keep the Lannisters from consolidating and crushing the Starks. At no time did she ever intend to see Renly be king. In fact, I think that had Stannis not killed Renly, she would have. Olenna is trying to systematically remove anyone who could possibly challenge Aegon's claim to the throne. She orchestrates Joffrey's murder and Margaery's marriage to Tommen; planning to see him dead as well.
12: Loras goes to Dragonstone nominally to lay siege to it, but in reality he fakes his maiming by some means and goes off to link up with Aegon and, presumably, acquire or bring some sort of proof that he is the real Aegon.


So that brings us more or less up to speed. So there are several conspiracy theories that are encompassed by this, namely the "Young Griff is not Aegon" theory. I personally subscribe to the belief that he's a descendant of the Blackfyres and that's why he looks Targaryen. I think that Olenna's marrying Mace to a Hightower was significant: Maesters are not incorruptible. Pycelle is the highest Maester in the land and is incredibly corrupt. I believe Olenna has been using her Hightower connections to plant Maesters in strategic places. This isn't necessary for the theory to work, but would help explain how everything runs smoothly.

Does anyone actually believe that Cersei tricked Loras into going to Dragonstone and risking his own life? Are we being serious? First of all, that would require Cersei (who is chronically incompetent) to pull one over on Olenna. Second, Loras is a tourney knight. Leading a siege isn't glamorous and you can forget about charging into boiling oil. That's just not him. He doesn't do heroics.

Olenna is essentially using Tyrell's heirs and armies to keep everything destabilized while her own armies see very little action. Let's be real: The Starks are nonexistant, the Tully armies are either dead or surrounded, the Arryn armies are in-fighting, the Lannisters have exhausted themselves against the Starks and Tullies, and Greyjoy has lost a ruler and has been stymied. And the Baratheon men are all either dead or off fighting giants. Meanwhile the Tyrells have an army that is well-fed and numbering somewhere around eighty-thousand men conservatively. The only real body left for them to deal with is Dorne, which only has ten thousand spears at last count. I think that what will wind up happening is the Tyrells fighting Dorne+Young Griff+ Maybe Daenarys and even then they'll give them a run for their money, but Daenarys and Young Griff will eventually win, marry, and rule or Stannis will surprise us all and become king (if we're being honest, his character arc is headed in the right direction).

To the end of getting rid of heirs, do we really believe that Olenna off'd Joffrey because she thought he'd beat Margaery? Seriously? Margaery is the series' black widow. Olenna is using her to get close to possible heirs and summarily kill them. It makes literally no sense that Olenna would give up Margaery's being Queen unless she thought that they could do better, i.e. have someone that they have been raising since he was a baby be king AND have Margaery be Queen.

I think Stannis will be King. What we originally saw was that Daenarys didn't want anything to do with Westeros and she was going to be an unwilling Queen. Now she thinks that she deserves it. So her character arc is headed in the exact wrong direction. Meanwhile, Stannis' character arc is headed in the right direction. Basically Stannis began the fight for his being King with the impression that he should be King because that's what's right and that's how it should be. Not necessarily that he deserved it or really wanted it, but it was just how it should be. Now he's done a one-eighty and instead of saying he should be king because that's the law, he's doing things that a good king would do. When the Wall called for help he was the only one that answered. GRRM is demonstrating that Stannis would make a commendable ruler.

I've seen an interview with GRRM where he sort of says the same thing that you're saying: "Before, Stannis was trying to become king to save the realm, but now he's trying to save the realm to become king."

Which is one of the reasons i began to like him even more so later in the story.

[United Marxist Nations]

The same reason Aegon should be at the top. Strategy.

He may be a decent tactician at best, but he's a strategist of brilliant sorts. Barring the fact that he destroyed Reyne and Tarbeck in his youth, he used deception to win (or, at least, greatly shorten) Robert's Rebellion, masterminded the Red Wedding, etc. Say what you want about the man (I am personally disgusted by him), he knows how to win a war. Or, at least, knows how to make his house profit from it.

Those types of deception does not equal military brilliance-otherwise, Walder Frey would be at the top of this list. I don't disagree that Tywin is possibly the most skilled at winning wars and generally excelling, but that is due to his diplomatic ability and underhanded deals, not his ability as a military commander as the poll question asks.

It does equal that though; deception and reconnaissance are perhaps two of the most important parts of military strategy. That Robb fell into the Red Wedding in the first place shows that he has little grasp of at least the latter two. And let's not forget that Robb's poor strategy was the whole reason that happened. Had he just married the Frey girl like he'd been told, or not killed Karstark, then he wouldn't have had to go back. Face it, Robb's only good for tactics, which, in the end, makes him a terrible commander.

[New Frenco Empire]

To everyone stating the contrary, military strategy doesn't just consist of moving troops into battle effectively. There's intelligence and psychology involved. In a modern setting, the cyber-warfare officer probably has as much value as the field colonel. Tywin, Aegon, etc. mastered warfare by using this.

[Haydn]

People who have read ADWD, what do you think happened to Jon Snow? Do you believe Melisandre will bring him back to life or what? I was just pondering over this today and want to see what people think.

[Charellia]

People who have read ADWD, what do you think happened to Jon Snow? Do you believe Melisandre will bring him back to life or what? I was just pondering over this today and want to see what people think.

I think there are four possibilities.
1. Melisandre or somebody with a similar power will bring him back to life.
2. He will come back as a white walker similar to Coldhands
3. He will come back as Ghost.
4. He is actually dead.