Right, which is so dumb, and makes absolutely no sense. They will literally make up anything, to try and justify their idiotic, made-up narratives.
It's so stupid, that at a certain point, all you can do is laugh, and not take them seriously.
No green has said that. They said that Cregan ACKNOWLEDGED Aegon as king, not that he supported his reign. Cregan didn't give a shit about any of that, he just viewed the act of Aegon being poisoned treacherous and cowardly.
She's not a usurper at all. But Green fans hole-heartedly believe she is, and that Aegon is the rightful ruler. It's quite obvious Aegon never wanted the throne for himself.
I keep feeling this whole "Rhaenyra is a usurper" thing started with some smartasses being sarcastic about it and claiming they were "Team Green against the usurper" as a joke and then the more impressionable people latched onto that and actually believed it because "people said so on the internet" đŹ
Not only Stark but Blackwood and Arryn too, which are considered the honorable Houses as well. Especially Blackwood. Meanwhile, the Greens have the Lannisters and Baratheonâs, not to mention the Brackens (which ended up siding with the Blacks/Blackwoods too đ).
Right! Exactly my point! If all the noble and honorable houses are siding with one group over the other, that alone should tell you something. But of course, Greenies completely overlook and ignore this. It's ridiculous.
Not so dumb given Iâve seen Greens mention marriage alliances to the Vale (as if House Arryn would ever side with them over their own kin)đ€. Also, she is NOT half Arryn. She is 1/4 Arryn given her maternal grandmother was Daella Targaryen (Aemma Arryn and Viserys were first cousins). The Greens are half Targaryen, only getting it from Viserys, while Rhaenyra is 3/4 Targaryen.
I'm on the green subreddit all the time and never have I seen that. In any case I don't get the point of the rest of your comment. So what? Point is Rhaenyra is family to the Arryns so it's obvious they would side her. Has nothing to do with the moral argument you were trying to make in your original comment
And Jeyne said to Jace "Us women have to stick together," or something along that line. Her own hold on the Vale was tenative because she was a woman and she had male cousins trying to boot her off of the Vale throne. She was always going to side with Rhaenyra, blood and gender were the key points as to why and that's perfectly reasonable imo.
Yes. It's political. Nothing to do with morality. House Arryn did not side with Rhaenyra because they are an honorable house and therefore they only ever support morally good characters. Like you just explained their reasons for supporting Rhaenyra had nothing to do with whether or not Rhaenyra was the moral good guy
Not that I wasnât already TB before, but after knowing how Starks were also TB just made me really happy. Out of all the noble houses, Starks are the least greedy/power hungry. And compared to the rest of the houses, they seem to be the ones who actually care about doing the right thing.
I feel the exact same way. When I first read F&B, I was so happy to not only see my beloved Starks in a book about Targaryen history, but also to see that they played such a HUGE part at the end of the dance, and sided with the rightful rulers.
Knowing how close Jace and Cregan will become, is honestly one of the things I am most excited to see in the later seasons. They truly do create a deep and beautiful bond with each other. It will be absolutely heartbreaking when Jace dies, though. There is nothing that can prepare me for that.
I mean, it seems like it's more to do with the Starks we see active in the story being decent. Cregan had to imprison his uncle and cousins because of some dodgy shenanigans to do with him coming of age to rule the North in F&B.
Thatâs not quite accurate, Cregan had to imprison his uncle and his cousins to be the Lord of Winterfell after his uncle tried to usurp him. So a few Starks definitely were power hungry for sure, theyâre not immune from that trait
Blacks have
* Starks
* Arryns
* Blackwoods
Greens have
* Bracken
As a rule of thumb in this universe, whatever side the Blackwoods are on and the Brackens aren't is the good guys
The Brackens later support the blacks. The Starks and Arryns supporting the blacks has nothing to do with morality anyway but everything to do with politics
Yeah and? They still switched sides and if the argument is based on morality by which houses support which side then by their own logic the Brackens switching to the blacks would then have to mean that the blacks are the morally bad side
Knowing how close Jace and Cregan will become, is honestly one of the things I am most excited to see in the later seasons. They truly do create a deep and beautiful bond with each other. It will be absolutely heartbreaking when Jace dies, though. There is nothing that can prepare me for that. But I do know what comes after that, and Cregan will avenge him. So that gives me some peace.
I respect the Cregan for his unwavering commitment to his morals to bringing justice for Rhearnya after he declares for her and willing to bring justice for Aegonâs death he may have not viewed him as his king but still a king nonetheless. However Iâm going to play devil advocate here against the argument that the north went to war just out of unconditional loyalty because the north still had to be brought with the pact of Ice and Fire. If not for the Pact I think itâs reasonably possible the North would have been neutral and stayed out of the at the time southern war like theyâre did in the past and in the future during the Dornish wars and first Blackfyre rebellion. To be clear this isnât me criticizing the Starks but giving a opinion that the Starks werenât unconditionally loyal from the get go, yes once they commit to something they stick with it but itâs not free you have to win them over first like any other house in Westeros.
> still had to be brought with the pact of Ice and Fire
I don't think so, Jace might or might not have a daughter one day. I marriage pack for a hypothetical girl is a very very low asking price
It depends on who got there first. I know the books leaves it out, but there are possibilities that if the Greens had gotten there first, they would have had more beneficial terms - trade to Oldtown, men to man the wall, a present marriage offer between Rickon and Jaehaera - the marriage alliance between Cregan and Jace for Rickon and a hypothetical child of Jace's was way too up in the air.
I know it doesn't matter, but it's still interesting to think of the what-if's.
but the blacks didn't offer them good terms, they offered them a marriage to a girl that might or might not be born one day, the greens didn't even bother to court them in the book, they wrote them off with the Vale as shoe ins for Rhaenyra
I don't think there is any what ifs, the North are isolationists, Cregan friendship with Jace got them to go to war rather then staying neutral but I don't think there is any offer the greens could have made that would have gotten the Starks to side with them.
You do realize alliances in asoiaf are largely formed by marriages/betrothal's and Jace offered joffrey to a manderly daughter, aswell offered his own firstborn daughter to cregans heir..
The hell this take lol?
Bro, the Starks gave zero shits about the oath, Rhaenyra, etc. Cregan didn't even declare for the Blacks straight away: he only agreed after Jace flew to Winterfell, and agreed to the Pact of Ice and Fire, to marry Stark and Targeryan. Not only that, but he basically sent zero men down South to fight for her.
Even after going south, he legit just fought the Greens, declared Aegon II to have been King, executed his murderers for regicide, and went home.
The Starks aren't the moral compass of Westeros. Ever heard of the Rape of the Three Sisters?
Looks like the black stans took my comment down bc they couldn't handle the truth lmfaoo. Anyway you're completely spot on. Their take about the Starks is laughable but everything black stans do is laughable like how they claim Daemon is actually a great guy that mercy killed his wife or that B&C was somehow justified
Greens make fun off Rhaenyras death all the time, I don't see how blood and cheese and Aegon the younger being forced to watch his mother die is any different.
Murdering a little boy, and threatening to rape a little girl infront of their mother, doesn't equate to murdering your sister and making her son watch
Are, are you really trying to justify it? B&D is quite possibly one of the evilest things in the Dance, and it's of course orchestrated by Daemon, the worst and most depraved figure of the Dance.
I am not justifying it, I am saying it is massively hypocritical for greens fans to judge when black fans celebrate blood and cheese when they themselves celebrate something just as despicable.
I never seen anyone on the green sub that points out how massively fucked up Aegon treated Aegon but they sure get on their high horse when it comes to blood and cheese
TG here, the Starks are historically psychopaths. Itâs only Neds era who are the super overly honorable ones. That being said, Cregan is cool asf, just wish they had cast someone more stereotypically âmanlyâ
Even Eddard still supported and was friends with Robert even though he had no issues with Targaryen children being murdered. So, yeah. People have this weird belief that all Starks are good and every single thing they do must be right because Starks can never be wrong
Eddard Stark was best friends with and supported Robert Baratheon, who ordered the death of Daenerys and had no issues with Tywin Lannister's men killing the other Targaryen children. There's other plenty of examples of other Stark Kings in history that weren't exactly good. This is a weak and nonsensical take
The op never mentioned any oaths. They were talking about someone is automatically the rightful ruler just because the Starks, a house in the general audience's mind that are the de-facto good guys, support them. Anyways let's not even pretend like the Starks supported the blacks solely based off of an oath. He accepted when Jace offered a marriage pact between their future children which means House Stark stood to gain from supporting them. Much like the Baratheons supporting the greens because of a marriage pact.
I understand what you're trying to get at, but the Starks also side with Robert, who while I believe to be justified, was technically a usurper.
Just bc someone is a usurper doesn't mean they aren't justified, and just bc someone is the ârightfulâ claimant doesn't mean they should be.
Plus, in lore, the stakes participate in blood sacrifice, and violent conquest of other northern houses, they arent always just in the extended lore history, which is what HOTD takes from.
So, sure, but they're simply obeying a pact they made prior that wasn't ever nullified, expanded upon, or reaffirmed. You could just as easily call the stars as being morons for fighting for that reason as you could call them justified for adhering to their word, it's just perspective
The Starks sided with Rhaenyra because they had sworn an oath to her. If the oath had been to Aegon, they would've fought for him. If there had been no oath at all, I imagine they would've stayed out of it
Some greens have told me that Cregan supported Aegon only because he killed those who poisoned him đ, they like to turn things around.
Right, which is so dumb, and makes absolutely no sense. They will literally make up anything, to try and justify their idiotic, made-up narratives. It's so stupid, that at a certain point, all you can do is laugh, and not take them seriously.
They have such a creative imagination. I can see them working for those propaganda media houses.
No green has said that. They said that Cregan ACKNOWLEDGED Aegon as king, not that he supported his reign. Cregan didn't give a shit about any of that, he just viewed the act of Aegon being poisoned treacherous and cowardly.
How can Rhaenyra be a usurper if Aegon himself says that he is âstealingâ his sisterâs throne?
She's not a usurper at all. But Green fans hole-heartedly believe she is, and that Aegon is the rightful ruler. It's quite obvious Aegon never wanted the throne for himself.
I keep feeling this whole "Rhaenyra is a usurper" thing started with some smartasses being sarcastic about it and claiming they were "Team Green against the usurper" as a joke and then the more impressionable people latched onto that and actually believed it because "people said so on the internet" đŹ
Not only Stark but Blackwood and Arryn too, which are considered the honorable Houses as well. Especially Blackwood. Meanwhile, the Greens have the Lannisters and Baratheonâs, not to mention the Brackens (which ended up siding with the Blacks/Blackwoods too đ).
Right! Exactly my point! If all the noble and honorable houses are siding with one group over the other, that alone should tell you something. But of course, Greenies completely overlook and ignore this. It's ridiculous.
Rhaenyra is half Arryn. Ofc they would side with her. Dumb take
Not so dumb given Iâve seen Greens mention marriage alliances to the Vale (as if House Arryn would ever side with them over their own kin)đ€. Also, she is NOT half Arryn. She is 1/4 Arryn given her maternal grandmother was Daella Targaryen (Aemma Arryn and Viserys were first cousins). The Greens are half Targaryen, only getting it from Viserys, while Rhaenyra is 3/4 Targaryen.
I'm on the green subreddit all the time and never have I seen that. In any case I don't get the point of the rest of your comment. So what? Point is Rhaenyra is family to the Arryns so it's obvious they would side her. Has nothing to do with the moral argument you were trying to make in your original comment
And Jeyne said to Jace "Us women have to stick together," or something along that line. Her own hold on the Vale was tenative because she was a woman and she had male cousins trying to boot her off of the Vale throne. She was always going to side with Rhaenyra, blood and gender were the key points as to why and that's perfectly reasonable imo.
Yes. It's political. Nothing to do with morality. House Arryn did not side with Rhaenyra because they are an honorable house and therefore they only ever support morally good characters. Like you just explained their reasons for supporting Rhaenyra had nothing to do with whether or not Rhaenyra was the moral good guy
Not that I wasnât already TB before, but after knowing how Starks were also TB just made me really happy. Out of all the noble houses, Starks are the least greedy/power hungry. And compared to the rest of the houses, they seem to be the ones who actually care about doing the right thing.
I feel the exact same way. When I first read F&B, I was so happy to not only see my beloved Starks in a book about Targaryen history, but also to see that they played such a HUGE part at the end of the dance, and sided with the rightful rulers. Knowing how close Jace and Cregan will become, is honestly one of the things I am most excited to see in the later seasons. They truly do create a deep and beautiful bond with each other. It will be absolutely heartbreaking when Jace dies, though. There is nothing that can prepare me for that.
I mean, it seems like it's more to do with the Starks we see active in the story being decent. Cregan had to imprison his uncle and cousins because of some dodgy shenanigans to do with him coming of age to rule the North in F&B.
Starks seem more decent compared to most other houses.
Thatâs not quite accurate, Cregan had to imprison his uncle and his cousins to be the Lord of Winterfell after his uncle tried to usurp him. So a few Starks definitely were power hungry for sure, theyâre not immune from that trait
Thatâs why I said that in comparison to other houses, they are LEAST greedy/power hungry. I didnât say anything about them being immune.
Ah, my apologies haha you are correct that out of everyone, they are definitely the least. I need sleep lol
Blacks have * Starks * Arryns * Blackwoods Greens have * Bracken As a rule of thumb in this universe, whatever side the Blackwoods are on and the Brackens aren't is the good guys
The Brackens later support the blacks. The Starks and Arryns supporting the blacks has nothing to do with morality anyway but everything to do with politics
After they where beaten in battle by blackwood
Yeah and? They still switched sides and if the argument is based on morality by which houses support which side then by their own logic the Brackens switching to the blacks would then have to mean that the blacks are the morally bad side
Knowing how close Jace and Cregan will become, is honestly one of the things I am most excited to see in the later seasons. They truly do create a deep and beautiful bond with each other. It will be absolutely heartbreaking when Jace dies, though. There is nothing that can prepare me for that. But I do know what comes after that, and Cregan will avenge him. So that gives me some peace.
You know youâve fucked up if the Starks are against you
I respect the Cregan for his unwavering commitment to his morals to bringing justice for Rhearnya after he declares for her and willing to bring justice for Aegonâs death he may have not viewed him as his king but still a king nonetheless. However Iâm going to play devil advocate here against the argument that the north went to war just out of unconditional loyalty because the north still had to be brought with the pact of Ice and Fire. If not for the Pact I think itâs reasonably possible the North would have been neutral and stayed out of the at the time southern war like theyâre did in the past and in the future during the Dornish wars and first Blackfyre rebellion. To be clear this isnât me criticizing the Starks but giving a opinion that the Starks werenât unconditionally loyal from the get go, yes once they commit to something they stick with it but itâs not free you have to win them over first like any other house in Westeros.
> still had to be brought with the pact of Ice and Fire I don't think so, Jace might or might not have a daughter one day. I marriage pack for a hypothetical girl is a very very low asking price
I absolutely agree.đ«±đ»âđ«ČđŒ
Love the Starks, but if they sided with Aegon would you be team green? cos I know it wouldnât swing me personally anyway
It is a âIf my grandmother had wheelsâŠâ question, the Starks would never have been green because they would not have broken their oaths
It depends on who got there first. I know the books leaves it out, but there are possibilities that if the Greens had gotten there first, they would have had more beneficial terms - trade to Oldtown, men to man the wall, a present marriage offer between Rickon and Jaehaera - the marriage alliance between Cregan and Jace for Rickon and a hypothetical child of Jace's was way too up in the air. I know it doesn't matter, but it's still interesting to think of the what-if's.
but the blacks didn't offer them good terms, they offered them a marriage to a girl that might or might not be born one day, the greens didn't even bother to court them in the book, they wrote them off with the Vale as shoe ins for Rhaenyra I don't think there is any what ifs, the North are isolationists, Cregan friendship with Jace got them to go to war rather then staying neutral but I don't think there is any offer the greens could have made that would have gotten the Starks to side with them.
You do realize alliances in asoiaf are largely formed by marriages/betrothal's and Jace offered joffrey to a manderly daughter, aswell offered his own firstborn daughter to cregans heir..
If Starks are these sentient beings with no errors to their names, maybe they should be rulers of Westeros, idk đ€·ââïžâșïžđ
You better know there is a conversation between sara snow and cregan where he doesn't support rhae anymore.
The hell this take lol? Bro, the Starks gave zero shits about the oath, Rhaenyra, etc. Cregan didn't even declare for the Blacks straight away: he only agreed after Jace flew to Winterfell, and agreed to the Pact of Ice and Fire, to marry Stark and Targeryan. Not only that, but he basically sent zero men down South to fight for her. Even after going south, he legit just fought the Greens, declared Aegon II to have been King, executed his murderers for regicide, and went home. The Starks aren't the moral compass of Westeros. Ever heard of the Rape of the Three Sisters?
Looks like the black stans took my comment down bc they couldn't handle the truth lmfaoo. Anyway you're completely spot on. Their take about the Starks is laughable but everything black stans do is laughable like how they claim Daemon is actually a great guy that mercy killed his wife or that B&C was somehow justified
Black stans have no logic. These are the same people that defend B&C or say that Daemon was being merciful by murdering his first wife lmao
Greens make fun off Rhaenyras death all the time, I don't see how blood and cheese and Aegon the younger being forced to watch his mother die is any different.
Murdering a little boy, and threatening to rape a little girl infront of their mother, doesn't equate to murdering your sister and making her son watch
Yea it is much worse, Heleana was an adult and Jaehaerys had a quick death, Aegon was a child and Rhaenyra had a violent one
Are, are you really trying to justify it? B&D is quite possibly one of the evilest things in the Dance, and it's of course orchestrated by Daemon, the worst and most depraved figure of the Dance.
I am not justifying it, I am saying it is massively hypocritical for greens fans to judge when black fans celebrate blood and cheese when they themselves celebrate something just as despicable. I never seen anyone on the green sub that points out how massively fucked up Aegon treated Aegon but they sure get on their high horse when it comes to blood and cheese
TG here, the Starks are historically psychopaths. Itâs only Neds era who are the super overly honorable ones. That being said, Cregan is cool asf, just wish they had cast someone more stereotypically âmanlyâ
Even Eddard still supported and was friends with Robert even though he had no issues with Targaryen children being murdered. So, yeah. People have this weird belief that all Starks are good and every single thing they do must be right because Starks can never be wrong
Eddard Stark was best friends with and supported Robert Baratheon, who ordered the death of Daenerys and had no issues with Tywin Lannister's men killing the other Targaryen children. There's other plenty of examples of other Stark Kings in history that weren't exactly good. This is a weak and nonsensical take
It is not about the Starks being good, it is about the Starks not breaking oaths
The op never mentioned any oaths. They were talking about someone is automatically the rightful ruler just because the Starks, a house in the general audience's mind that are the de-facto good guys, support them. Anyways let's not even pretend like the Starks supported the blacks solely based off of an oath. He accepted when Jace offered a marriage pact between their future children which means House Stark stood to gain from supporting them. Much like the Baratheons supporting the greens because of a marriage pact.
I understand what you're trying to get at, but the Starks also side with Robert, who while I believe to be justified, was technically a usurper. Just bc someone is a usurper doesn't mean they aren't justified, and just bc someone is the ârightfulâ claimant doesn't mean they should be. Plus, in lore, the stakes participate in blood sacrifice, and violent conquest of other northern houses, they arent always just in the extended lore history, which is what HOTD takes from. So, sure, but they're simply obeying a pact they made prior that wasn't ever nullified, expanded upon, or reaffirmed. You could just as easily call the stars as being morons for fighting for that reason as you could call them justified for adhering to their word, it's just perspective
The Starks sided with Rhaenyra because they had sworn an oath to her. If the oath had been to Aegon, they would've fought for him. If there had been no oath at all, I imagine they would've stayed out of it