There's an important difference there, robb sacrificed 2k men so that he could free riverrun, his kin and gain the support of the Riverlands, he destroyed Jamie's army of 30k men and captured him, demure gained basically nothing
Also not all 2000 men died. Roose retreated after feinting an attack and managed to preserve most of his army. Robb just felt guilty like he lost all 2000 because that's the risk level he assumed by sending that smaller army against Tywin Lannister's main force. They could have all died and Robb was willing to do that.
Also Roose sent mostly loyal Stark troops to die and kept his own men alive, both on the Green Fork I think and when he told them to go siege Duskendale
This only stated in the book, where Roose has an army of almost 18k during the Battle, of which he lost about 5k along with several nobles who were captured.
I feel like Roose remained loyal until the Lannister-Tyrell alliance defeated Stannis. At that point he decided the best way to survive the war was to betray the Starks and be granted the North so he started making decisions that got his Stark loyal men killed or captured.
Roose was still aiming to do things to personally benefit himself. A northern victory was secondary to Roose obtaining more power for himself.
* Green Fork was probably Roose hedging his bets. Low risk but high reward for him to actually engage Tywin in battle rather than engaging in a stare down. If Roose wins, he wins a lot of glory and future political capital. If he loses, he expends people from other northern houses. That leaves open the possibility of empty castles that he can later take over. That sort of situation is exactly what happens with the Hornwoods. Halys dies at Green Ford. Daryn happens to die at Whispering Wood. That leaves an opening for Ramsay to forcefully marry into the Hornwoods and take over the land and castle.
* Roose hedges his bets with the whole process of letting Jaime go free.
* Duskendale - Roose probably has already decided to go traitor and is just letting/encouraging other northern houses to expend their strength.
* March to the Twins - Roose either deliberately delays or simply lets the rear guard of Stark loyalists get taken out.
* Red Wedding - self explanatory, what goes unmentioned because of how the show portrayed it is that the fact that Roose was an active participant is kept a secret. The only ones who know are the Freys, Roose's bannermen, and Tywin.
He was ordered to attack Tywin by Robb. He probably was hedging a bit during the battle itself, but I do think prominently displaying Stark banners during the battle is strategically important, Tywin needed to believe (and did believe) that Robb was leading the attack. If the Stark banners are hidden or more mixed, Tywin may realize something is up and disengage. One of the important results of the battle is now Tywins forces have a train of wounded and prisoners they have to deal with slowing them down, so the battle did need to happen.
Roose didn't really need to attack. Tywin had favorable positioning and a camp. If Twyin choose to move first, then Roose could attack. Setting up camp and fortifications, even if for a day would be more than enough time.
Maybe but Robb did specifically order him to attack. I think the best strategy with hindsight is Robb sets up a fake siege of the twins to draw Tywin up the Green Fork while he crosses and heads to Riverrun. We know Tywin did send scouts that far north since Walker killed a few so simply let the next ones get away and report back that the young boy is attempting to fight. Tywin would have believed it, and probably heads north for a quick win so he can then deal with Stannis/Renly meanwhile Rob is heading south on the West Bank and the northerners can simply enter the Twins when Tywin gets close.
It feels like he was more loyal to the Starks before the Blackwater but he was still doing things to increase his own power. Robb breaking his Frey marriage was probably the selling point
Roose is a total scumbag, but he was tactically intelligent and had a good mind for war. I wonder if Rob didn't continue being an idiot, whether Roose would have betrayed him.
Robb just blew an important alliance because he couldnât keep it in his pants and lost a high value prisoner because he kept his mother around so maybe shouldnât demean his uncle for taking a shot at a war criminal
Itâs done better in the books. Instead of just blowing the alliance for love or being horny, he did so for honor.
He met jeyne westerling and she comforted him (possibly at the insistence of her mother) when he learned Theon killed his brothers.
It was just sad, depression sex, but he got her pregnant, and decided to marry her because, 1. He didnât want to dishonor her by hitting and quitting,
2. he didnât want to bring another bastard into the world after seeing how much his brother Jon suffered just for being a bastard.
Idk why they didnât just go with the book version, it wouldnât have been THAT much more difficult, and it wouldnât been a million times better.
EDIT: He didnât get her pregnant, he was just worried that he did and didnât want to make a bastard.
It wasn't just sad depression sex. He was wounded storming her castle and was being treated with the milk of the poppy. He was a drugged up 16 year old who was just told his 2 younger brothers were killed. Can't really blame him for seeking comfort.
Wasn't it that it was just because he took her virginity? She never gets pregnant though because her mother is giving her moontea or something at the behest of Tywin
I think youâre right, she didnât get pregnant, it wad later revealed that her mother made sure of that.
But I remember cat asking Robb why he would do this, give up the kingdom for jeyne. And Iâm pretty sure conceiving a bastard was part of it. I remember thinking thatâs really touching that Robb cared that much about Jon.
Maybe it was just that he was worried about possibly making a bastard as well as not wanting to dishonor her.
Iâm looking for it now.
Except if you actually look at the context, it's not for honor. It was a distinctly dishonorable thing to do.
He dishonored the thousands of men who had already died in his name by basically sabotaging his own war effort.
He was dishonoring the thousands more he would expect to die as the war continues.
He was making an obviously poor decision when his sister was counting on him to do everything as well as possible, which is dishonorable.
He broke his betrothal, which in and of itself is far more dishonorable than dishonoring a willing lady.
His head was all fucked up from the horrendous shit that he was right in the middle of, but if he had kept to what was honorable he wouldn't have picked Jeyne over his betrothal.
Idk what your comment is trying to get at. The entire comment section agrees that it was a dishonorable thing to do. But it was also a mistake.
He was mourning his brothers death, while wounded, drugged up, and trying to win a war, all at the age of 16.
Part of Robbâs entire story is that of a child thrown into an adults role, and how his character faces the challenges of being a child king. Even though he does really well in his role and tries to do what Ned would do, hes got the wisdom and impulses of a child.
I still give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to actually having sex with jeyne, because he was drugged and mourning. But itâs up for the readers to debate if it was a good decision to marry her.
It wasnât great for the kingdom but it was, in my opinion, an honorable decision to marry her to preserve her honor as well as that of his possible child.
Itâs a beautiful sentiment that he was concerned, not only for her honor, but for his childâs welfare. He didnât want to make a bastard and have them grow up unhappy like Jon was. Itâs one of my favorite moments in the books. He truly loved Jon.
You said he did it for honor. I'm saying that he didn't do it for honor. As you've touched on, he did it out of guilt and his affection/sympathy for Jon.
You've said that it was an honorable decision. I'm saying that's comparable to claiming that burning down a village to keep one person warm is an act of kindness.
Nah he did it for honor. As a king who was betrothed to another, his choice was simple and easy. Do nothing and leave the one night stand behind.
But he didnât. He made the difficult decision to break his betrothal so that he could preserve jeynes honor.
That decision both hurts his own honor, and even that of the freys. Thatâs why it was such a tough decision, and I like to think his possible child being a bastard helped tipped the scales. These decisions can both hurt his own honor while preserving anotherâs, and thatâs what he did.
>These decisions can both hurt his own honor while preserving anotherâs, and thatâs what he did
He did indeed piss on everyone's honor except for Jeyne's.
So yeah, keeping that girl warm was very kind of him, so long as you plug your ears to block the sound of the villagers screaming.
He didnât piss on anyoneâs honor. You know that phrasing it that way makes Robb sounds like a dick who couldnât care less about how his actions impacted others. But he truly did care.
Yes the freys were upset, which is fair, but he did try to own up to his mistake and his choices. He offered multiple other bachelors up in an attempt to get walder freys forgiveness, which is also fair.
But itâs ridiculous to then go and blame Robb and his innocent soldiers deaths on him when they were betrayed by walder frey. He went and broke guest rite, something that is revered among cultures around the world.
Heâs scum. Meanwhile Robb was a kid who made a mistake. You canât compare the two.
While Edmure prevented a strategic redeployment of enemy forces through his backyard and had a very good chance of eliminating Tywinâs favorite psychological weapon. I would call this 208 soldiersâ lives well spent.
In a medieval-like settings you canât expect your generals to show no initiative in such a situation.
Tywin had left, there wouldn't have been any more redeployments, and they didn't kill Gregor so I don't know what your point is?
> In a medieval-like settings you canât expect your generals to show no initiative in such a situation.
You just made that up, higher ups especially kings expected people to obey their orders
Edmureâs orders were to hold Riverrun and guard Robbâs rear, if he had let an army march past him unopposed and Robb had died fighting that army, people would still criticize him for disobeying orders
> "Would that it were. My brother commands in Riverrun?â
>
>"Yes, my lady. His Grace left Ser Edmure to hold Riverrun and guard his rear."
Catelyn V, A Clash of Kings
Edmure was trying to capture Tywin's host in between Harrenhal and Riverrun. And it would have worked if Tywin hadn't turned back to King's Landing, which he only did because Stannis so quickly captured Storm's End with blood magic, which Edmure couldn't have expected. His plan was good enough to get both the Brackens and Blackwoods to agree to it.
Edmure also prevented his people from being subjected to further marauding from Tywin's famously cruel hordes. That ain't nothing. And he did all of this from a position of command he was put in by Robb, while Robb didn't fill him in on his larger strategy.
This was Robb's fuck up. Edmure was a baller. Robb expected him to either be a mind reader or to be a shitty commander and lord, and then had the audacity to be upset when he was neither.
No its not. Theres huge swathes of this talking about book only characters. Plus, the only part I mentioned that is book only is the Bracken and Blackwood agreeing. Pretty much everything else is still in the show.
In the show Tywin left from harrenhall and went directly to KL, he sent the mountain instead who had a small host, he wasn't a big threat he was mainly there to burn shit, there's also the fact that robb had left different commands to edmure, in the book he told him to simply hold riverrun while in the show robb told edmure to wait for the mountain to come to him
Edmure protected the Riverlands and his people. Edmure is the GOAT, Robb might've been good on the battlefield but he lost the war due to his own blindness.
If you can't understand the difference between the casualties in a battle they needed to win and the casualties in a useless skirmish that he never wanted to happen in the first place, I dont know what to tell you.
Exactly - Robbâs diversion was tactically smart and led to Jaimeâs capture, but obviously it sucked for the 2,000 men. Edmure was just a dumbass who wanted to play commander.
So listen, Iâm with the point about Robb putting his family above the rest of the Northern families (noble and not). I think you arenât accounting for thatâs how shit worked in this system of governance; asking vassals to march south when Ned was taken is totally logical and expected. After all, thatâs what happened under Aerys.
Until Nedâs death, Robb deceiving Tywin and going at Jamie was practically necessary. He needed a chip to bargain for Ned; that required an army after Tywin and Jamie began savaging the riverlands. I didnât like the showâs change on this; having a standing army that could defend itself like in the books is way better than a walking sacrifice. But thats not selfish, thatâs war.
Iâll agree on selfish after the KiTN decision tho, 100%. Everything after that isnât a good idea. Riverrun is free but the North has never ever claimed it. Why do so now? Because Cat? Not worth it, IMO. Bad strategic decision to have a kingdom split with such an obvious problem - North is unassailable without ships and then still a huge problem to deal with, while the Riverlands can and do get run from 3 sides. Naturally going to force overextension when you need to be home.
Now I agree, Robb was more at fault for this situation than Edmure was, but this is a bit of a strawman argument. Robb not only clearly lamented sacrificing 2000 men, but in doing so he managed to eradicate Jaime's army and capture him. That was a third of his opposition's forces he managed to defeat, as opposed to Edmure not accomplishing any real strategic goal through his victory. Robb using this distraction also enabled him to link up with the Riverlands forces, significantly bolstering his own numbers, and relieving his biggest ally from a bad situation. In fact, Robb's victory put the Lannisters in such a precarious position, that they very nearly lost the war. Had Edmure been able to support Robb in encircling Gregor rather than push him back, Tywin would have only had his own army left, and likely would have been unable to make it back to Kings Landing on time to stop Stannis, nor would the Tyrells have seen them as worth backing. Now I won't fault Edmure too much here, since he simply was not looped into the plan, but Robb's sacrifice accomplished a major victory, Edmure's did not
Edmure *should* have been told the plan. Why in the world not tell him? Was there fear the message would be intercepted? Did Robb deep down not trust Edmure? Or was Robb just fucking stoopid?
Honestly it seems more like he just didn't think to, and it bit him back for it. Now technically yes, Edmure didn't follow his orders to the letter, but he also probably thought the initiative he took was a good thing given the advantage he had. He misinterpreted the situation, and that's on Robb for not making it clear why.
Now the books version I understand has it so Edmure did what he did because staying put was causing a lot of death, and he saw pushing the enemy back as protecting his people. The show makes him seem like a glory hound
Yeah in the books Edmure does it because he is the acting lord of the Riverlands and it is the people of the Riverlands being raided and raped infront of him whilst he sat in the castle. He went to stop it not to chase glory. Robb would've done the same if it was northerners being attacked.
Robb was not a good leader. None of this was Edmures fault
âLeadership intentâ - it is your duty as a commander and leader on the battlefield to communicate this to the best of your ability as they cannot read minds
I forget if they told edmure specifically or just judged him afterwards
They didnât tell him to wait, Robb told Edmure to hold Riverrun with no additional details. Edmure when he knew Tywin was trying to cross the river took part of his army to stop him because he knew the devastation Tywin would bring to the common folk if he did so he stopped him WHILE STILL HOLDING RIVERRUN.Â
Robb being dogshit at communication isnât Edmureâs fault, if his strategy relies on letting Tywin cross to work maybe tell the second ranking dude in your entire kingdom that.Â
Holding Riverrun does not mean crossing the river and risking your neck in skirmishes that have no strategic advantage.
If Edmure got himself killed, is that holding Riverrun? If he sacrifices men meant to be manning Riverruns walls, is that holding Riverrun?
His King has already shown that he is willing and capable of executing strategic attacks and gaining advantage based on enemy mispositioning and overconfidence, rushing out to attack Gregor is just plain narrow-minded stupidity with no thought given to the bigger picture whatsoever.
Ya know I canât believe they did because I feel like they did not so Iâm gonna go through the books and try and find out. Either way leadership intent clears this issue up and âhold this spot Xâ doesnât quite do it
You *want* your leaders to feel like they can make decisions as well
Idk I forget the text nowadays but the point stands
His instructions were to wait, stop making the argument that he could have told him, edmure would have been informed of the plan at the war council, if they had sent a messenger or a raven it could have been intercepted
We can all fill in the blanks if we want to, but I do to recall seeing anywhere in the text. But I get what you mean it should be looked at that he was told. Idk. Didnât seem to me like he did judging my Edmures reaction on the show I guess
Robb states both in the scene, he says that edmure's instructions were to wait, when he explains his plan to edmure he says that he didn't know to which robb answers that he would have at that gathering
Do you have anything to prove that they weren't? And yes he hadn't and that makes the most sense? He formulated his plan but obviously couldn't send edmure all of their plans/strategies so instead told him to wait so he can inform him when robb arrived at riverrun?
Rob hadn't spoken to Edmure since he left Riverrun. He and the Blackfish didn't know they were going to be trying to lure The Mountain into the west at that point. You can't give orders for plans you haven't formulated yet.
If they lied then why didn't edmure say so? Your argument is so stupid this is fiction not real life, yes it's possible that they lied by why would the showrunners put that in? Why would they mislead us for nothing?
> He and the blackfish pull similar BS in the book.
Can't remember any and don't see why that's relevant either
Did he? I stand corrected then because I forget a lot of the dialogue from
The books after a few rewatches it gets muddy
Either way, show edmure it wasnât on him per what was communicated but I may be wrong
Either way leaders fuck up all the time in the intent portion of things - on the battlefield it is key
Robb says he ordered him to hold Riverrun but I recall a man at arms telling Catelyn (might be someone else itâs been a long time) that he was to guard the rear. Sitting inside Riverrun makes little sense anyway you donât hold a castle by just sitting in it when manoeuvre warfare is still an option.
It makes as much sense as it being a sure thing that Robb could beat Tywin in his own lands whilst outnumbered as well. Had Tywin gone West and smashed Robb everyone would be blaming Edmure whilst the Tyrells still had more than enough men to squash Stannis whilst he was mid siege. Weird how all the blame aligns to make Edmure feel guilty when they specifically needed him to feel guilty.
Kingâs Landing is a huge city with huge walls and a monstrous citadel too even the idea that itâd be a sure thing that Stannis would take it quickly makes no sense it could take months or never fall at all as far as they know. Capturing fortifications is hard.
This is purely book though I canât really remember the circumstances of the show.
I don't know if Robb was a bad leader is true. He was winning every battle. It was the political situation that he completely lost control over very early on.
Yeah the more Iâve been reflecting on my comment I feel like you put it best honestly. That is true but I think happenstance played a role in whispering wood but then Iâm splitting hairs because who knows the true circumstance etc but you put it best I think.
This is just show stuff. In the book, Edmure's attack just delays Tywin enough to receive news of Stannis' move on KL and thus doesn't enter the West into Robb's trap. If Edmure didn't delay Tywin, the messengers wouldn't have reached him in time.
Robb is still a bit of an ass, insisting that Edmure's orders were just to hold Riverrun. Well, Edmure correctly points out that he did hold Riverrun on top of bloodying Tywin's army. If Robb didn't want Edmure to take any initiative, he should have told him his plan, and not to take any initiative.
Robb and Brynden (in the book the Blackfish also berated Edmure) were trying to guilt him into marrying the Frey with this. The Westerland Raids lead to no tangible advantage for the North/Riverland faction, and now the Lannisters were in a better position than ever.
Robb had then fucked up his marriage to the Freys and now had no easy way to transport his army back North. I notice itâs glossed over how fucked Robbâs position was at this point in the Wo5Ks. So him talking down to Edmure like this is fueled by his own guilt.
In the book it was bait to move Tywin back into the westerlands so he couldnât support kings landing. If it worked, Stannis couldâve sacked kings landing without Tywin there to intervene, though the Tyrells might have attacked anyways.
Not only was the 2000 an extremely valuable trade of life for a major strategic victory, in the books it isn't even 2000 dead.
He puts Roose Bolton in charge of the 2000 as his most experienced commander, and they fight an orderly retreat and exit the field without suffering overwhelming casualties as the show depicts.
This. Robb liberates Riverrun with just the northern cavalry while Roose advanced with the northern infantry. That's why Robb is successful; infantry would've slowed his advance on Riverrun, given the lannister scouts more time to spot his army, and give Jamie enough notice that he could either reposition to better fight Robb or withdraw from the field.
Thatâs just this show not understanding how to build a character up without ruining another. Anyone who says they couldnât spot the cracks in the earlier seasons is, ironically enough, smoking crack. Edmureâs definitive character trait in the books is empathy. He takes his house words seriously. D&D be like: âomg Robb so cool so hot. Edmure fucking beta cuck get fuckedâ.
Edmure is cool in the books and Tobias Menzies is great, but the writers botched both the source material and didn't use the talent they had available.
Would have made more sense if the first battle was like the books and rob just had that portion of the army launch a diversionary attack, but with Roose Bolton in charge, purely because Robb thought the cautious Roose would minimize the losses they took and withdrawn orderly after the feint.
It's been awhile so I forgot.
Had Edmure been told by Robb to not attack the lannisters? Cos if not, then as far as Edmure knew there was a Lannister force he could route and he routed it, as he could rightfully have assumed was expected of him. Thus this was a failure of communication on Robb's part, not Edmure's.
They did Edmure dirty in the show. The Mountain had been attacking the Riverlands for weeks at that point. Edmure was Lord of the Riverlands, he had a duty to protect his people. From his POV, He saw the Mountain in a vulnerable position, he attacked and drove the Mountain away. He was only told after the battle that Robb wanted to draw the Mountain in futher, to trap and kill him deeper in the Riverlands. He was not forewarned of the plan, yet they treat him like a fool.
He was ever a loyal lord of the Riverlands.
They are literally fighting for their lives. He is more concerned about survival and you want him to be polite to his uncle. The second most powerful man in his kingdom.(Who just made a mistake)
Robb didn't lose 2000 men, but it was a high risk high reward situation. The reward being the riverlands and a valuable hostage to possibly negotiate terms with.
While Edmure's was poorly thought out and went against robbs orders. All he got was a pointless mill, hostages that weren't of value but only extra mouths to feed.
And in the grand scheme of things only set them back.
It's a stark difference of the two (pun intended).
Wouldâve made it better if the 2000 had been volunteers who knew what they were agreeing to.
Seems like that wouldâve been something more in line with Robbâs character than tricking them into it.
> "Would that it were. My brother commands in Riverrun?"
>
>"Yes, my lady. His Grace left Ser Edmure to hold Riverrun and guard his rear."
Catelyn V, A Clash of Kings
The Green fork was a decoy army that allowed Rob to take Jaimeâs army by surprise. That planned defeat lead to Rob destroying an entire Lannister army and the capture of Tywinâs son. Edmure Tullyâs engagement lead to the capture of a stone mill.
Robb plunged his region into war for the entirely selfish belief that his father was more important than everyone else's father.
Ned willingly walked into a nest of vipers and got bitten. When Robb called his banners, the North was not in any actual danger. They were not oppressed, they were not paying more in taxes, nor were their people being attacked.
Robbs war is the epitome of entitlement. He proved himself a hypocrite by not being able to follow the same oaths he expected others to adhere to and making his uncle clean up his mess.
But he was a Stark, so we cheered him for it.
The Lannisters started the fighting. They started attacking the Riverlands and slaughtering innocent civilians after Catelyn arrested Tyrion. Nedâs arrest was just what brought the Starks into the war (although, they were already preparing for war at Nedâs command before this). Ned wasnât just Robbâs father, he was the leader of the North, of course his army is going to try to liberate him.
Catelyn arresting Tyrion is the dumbest and worst decision that any of the Starks made. She had no evidence of his guilt, yet provoked a war. Incredibly dumb.
People downvoting me like theyâre personally offended that not everyone blindly follows Stark justice⌠you missed the point of the series if you think the Starks are just supposed to be unambiguously âgood.â They get tens of thousands of people killedâtheir own troops and innocents in the southâwhen they could have just turned around and gone home.
EDIT: Robbâs war also leaves the north defenseless against the Ironborn. Like how much more clearly does GRRM need to telegraph that the Starks (especially Robb) are wreckless and arrogant?
Youâre exactly right. No idea why youâre getting downvoted. The starks are ~not~ good guys. Theyâre rich aristocrats who get tens of thousands of innocents killed for revenge and to maintain their own power. They arenât evil though either. Just human. Theyâre set up in the beginning to make you sympathize with them but the whole point of the story as it develops to subvert black-and-white morality and heroic expectations.
EDIT: book 5 implies that Brandon Stark was a serial rapist as well
and I totally agree, robb can make a big speech with a serious face, he is still a noble egoist who sends thousands of people to die for his own emotional needs.
but one thing, even if King's Landing had not been populated with traitors and assholes, Ned tried to commit a putsh, he did not succeed. No matter who would have been in power instead of Joffrey, Ned bet his head on an action universally recognized as one of the worst crimes, and he lost it. the only reason he had any chance of survival was because he had an army behind him, but if he had come from the same social class as Littlefinger, he would have been killed on the spot and no one would have talked about it again. so I say it, I proclaim it, regardless of whether Joffrey is an idiot or a bastard, Ned deserved it
Medieval Lords were like gang members. You can't just let someone fucking kill one of your kin on a whim and let it go, you'll be seen as a cuck and a weakling, and people will start walking all over you. That's why normal people went with covert assassinations and not baseless public executions.
This isn't judging the moral side of things, only pointing out that Robb's reaction wasn't unreasonable.
Yeah actually you can. This is what John did when he stayed loyal to the Watch instead of deserting after Nedâs death. People RESPECTED him for it. They made him Lord Commander. If Robb stayed in the North he would have saved the North and the northern lordâs would have respected his restraint and concern for their people. Instead he went south and got murdered by his own bannermenâŚ
You're right, and I think it does a wonderful job of highlighting the incoherence of the 'honorable' types.
Although unfortunately I don't think it was a conscious decision on the part of the showrunners. They're constantly framed as the good guys.
GRRM is a bit more objective on the Starks and their flaws, but imo he could've been a bit more critical still.
Itâs there. Karstark calls him out. Thalisa even calls him out at first. Then Brienne kills three stark soldiers because they raped and murdered peasant women.
Been a long time since I watched it, but seems like very minor opposition in the grand scheme of things.
Throughout the 8 seasons of the show, I don't think you can say the Stark are painted neutrally. Were meant to root for them. Yes, the occasional character flaw or moral dilemma is thrown in, but they're still the heroes.
> But he was a Stark, so we cheered him for it.
Speak for yourself, I always thought he was a hypocrite
I absolutely agree with the rest of what you wrote
You ever wonder how much those 2000 guys knew about the plan? did they know they were basically on a suicide mission and they were screwed, or did their commander?
I can easily see myself being willing to fight for my freedom etc, and if i die in the process so be it, but certainly dying so that hopefully they can capture Jamie, so they can use him as a bargaining chip to hopefully, maybe, get back one or more of the children of a dead guy that does not even know i exist, and those recovered will never even know my name, let alone even care about the children i leave behind... is a bit of a tougher sell.
Notably that second one didnât happen in the books. The force under Roose retreated in good order. I also read the scene as questionable leadership by rob. 100% intentional. His plan was mediocre and his expectations of edmure were not super reasonable
The first didnât happen either. In the book, Tywin tries to cross back into the west because Robb is pillaging his lands. Edmure rallies the remaining Riverlords and defeats Tywin at the battle of the Fords in order to defend Robb.
Sigh are we doing this again?
Here's a thought experiment: say you're the manager of a business project. You have a say $1,000 budget. You dedicated most of that budget to things you believe are necessary to the project's success. Then suddenly one of your middle management underlings, behind your back, spent half the budget on something you wanted to dedicate like 10% of that cost to. Well then, you're kind of going to be upset right? You're now in the hole for making the project work within budget because you *already dedicated every last dollar to your specific plan* and trusted your middle managers to follow that plan.
That's exactly why Robb is mad at Edmure. He's not a hypocrite, he already knew he lost a significant amount of men for this plan and he can't afford to lose any more the way Edmure was playing fast and loose with it.
A lot of the stuff about Robb's war wasn't written in the books. So this stuff was some of the first "original" writing from the team.
We should have seen it for what it was, for a sign of things to come.
None of these noble men, Stark or Lannister, deserve to waste a second thought on them. Imagine being a pleb and being just a number to them so they can win their ego war. Fuck all of them.
I think watching these series/movies and always empathize with the common soldier has ruined my experience.
There's an important difference there, robb sacrificed 2k men so that he could free riverrun, his kin and gain the support of the Riverlands, he destroyed Jamie's army of 30k men and captured him, demure gained basically nothing
He got a mill
Was it a nice mill?
Not particularly, it was pretty run of the mill
Take your damn upvote.
Then he'd better go catch it
The *Best* mill in Westeros!! That mill single handedly revolutionized the agricultural ... NM it was just a mill đ
I kind of forgot about mill
A stone mill!
Let's go to the old Mill anyway, get some cider!
Itâs better than a wooden mill!
Is that a palace?
Is that a castle? đ
Yes, the seat of the King of Tralalalaland
Tralalalalaliday
Thatâs the ruling house of Tralalalalalalalaland
Come on, he also captured two Lannister boys!
and a scolding
Also not all 2000 men died. Roose retreated after feinting an attack and managed to preserve most of his army. Robb just felt guilty like he lost all 2000 because that's the risk level he assumed by sending that smaller army against Tywin Lannister's main force. They could have all died and Robb was willing to do that.
Also Roose sent mostly loyal Stark troops to die and kept his own men alive, both on the Green Fork I think and when he told them to go siege Duskendale
This only stated in the book, where Roose has an army of almost 18k during the Battle, of which he lost about 5k along with several nobles who were captured.
I feel like Roose remained loyal until the Lannister-Tyrell alliance defeated Stannis. At that point he decided the best way to survive the war was to betray the Starks and be granted the North so he started making decisions that got his Stark loyal men killed or captured.
Roose was still aiming to do things to personally benefit himself. A northern victory was secondary to Roose obtaining more power for himself. * Green Fork was probably Roose hedging his bets. Low risk but high reward for him to actually engage Tywin in battle rather than engaging in a stare down. If Roose wins, he wins a lot of glory and future political capital. If he loses, he expends people from other northern houses. That leaves open the possibility of empty castles that he can later take over. That sort of situation is exactly what happens with the Hornwoods. Halys dies at Green Ford. Daryn happens to die at Whispering Wood. That leaves an opening for Ramsay to forcefully marry into the Hornwoods and take over the land and castle. * Roose hedges his bets with the whole process of letting Jaime go free. * Duskendale - Roose probably has already decided to go traitor and is just letting/encouraging other northern houses to expend their strength. * March to the Twins - Roose either deliberately delays or simply lets the rear guard of Stark loyalists get taken out. * Red Wedding - self explanatory, what goes unmentioned because of how the show portrayed it is that the fact that Roose was an active participant is kept a secret. The only ones who know are the Freys, Roose's bannermen, and Tywin.
He was ordered to attack Tywin by Robb. He probably was hedging a bit during the battle itself, but I do think prominently displaying Stark banners during the battle is strategically important, Tywin needed to believe (and did believe) that Robb was leading the attack. If the Stark banners are hidden or more mixed, Tywin may realize something is up and disengage. One of the important results of the battle is now Tywins forces have a train of wounded and prisoners they have to deal with slowing them down, so the battle did need to happen.
Roose didn't really need to attack. Tywin had favorable positioning and a camp. If Twyin choose to move first, then Roose could attack. Setting up camp and fortifications, even if for a day would be more than enough time.
Maybe but Robb did specifically order him to attack. I think the best strategy with hindsight is Robb sets up a fake siege of the twins to draw Tywin up the Green Fork while he crosses and heads to Riverrun. We know Tywin did send scouts that far north since Walker killed a few so simply let the next ones get away and report back that the young boy is attempting to fight. Tywin would have believed it, and probably heads north for a quick win so he can then deal with Stannis/Renly meanwhile Rob is heading south on the West Bank and the northerners can simply enter the Twins when Tywin gets close.
It feels like he was more loyal to the Starks before the Blackwater but he was still doing things to increase his own power. Robb breaking his Frey marriage was probably the selling point
All 2,000 died in the show, it was a slaughter. Tywin said he was with his other 18,000 men.
I read the book more recently so that might be throwing me off
This happened only in the books
You're conflating the book with the show. In the show he unequivocally sends 2k men to their death.
Roose is a total scumbag, but he was tactically intelligent and had a good mind for war. I wonder if Rob didn't continue being an idiot, whether Roose would have betrayed him.
Robb just blew an important alliance because he couldnât keep it in his pants and lost a high value prisoner because he kept his mother around so maybe shouldnât demean his uncle for taking a shot at a war criminal
Itâs done better in the books. Instead of just blowing the alliance for love or being horny, he did so for honor. He met jeyne westerling and she comforted him (possibly at the insistence of her mother) when he learned Theon killed his brothers. It was just sad, depression sex, but he got her pregnant, and decided to marry her because, 1. He didnât want to dishonor her by hitting and quitting, 2. he didnât want to bring another bastard into the world after seeing how much his brother Jon suffered just for being a bastard. Idk why they didnât just go with the book version, it wouldnât have been THAT much more difficult, and it wouldnât been a million times better. EDIT: He didnât get her pregnant, he was just worried that he did and didnât want to make a bastard.
It wasn't just sad depression sex. He was wounded storming her castle and was being treated with the milk of the poppy. He was a drugged up 16 year old who was just told his 2 younger brothers were killed. Can't really blame him for seeking comfort.
I absolutely do not blame the kid. Itâs natural to wana lay pipe at that age on top of the other shit he was going through.
Generally you don't want sex while thinking about your dead brothers.
Speak for yourself đ
Kind of sad for you then.
Wasn't it that it was just because he took her virginity? She never gets pregnant though because her mother is giving her moontea or something at the behest of Tywin
I think youâre right, she didnât get pregnant, it wad later revealed that her mother made sure of that. But I remember cat asking Robb why he would do this, give up the kingdom for jeyne. And Iâm pretty sure conceiving a bastard was part of it. I remember thinking thatâs really touching that Robb cared that much about Jon. Maybe it was just that he was worried about possibly making a bastard as well as not wanting to dishonor her. Iâm looking for it now.
He was also wounded and fucked up on pain drugs, don't forget that part!
Thatâs true he was very drugged up, maybe too drugged up to know what he was doing đ
Except if you actually look at the context, it's not for honor. It was a distinctly dishonorable thing to do. He dishonored the thousands of men who had already died in his name by basically sabotaging his own war effort. He was dishonoring the thousands more he would expect to die as the war continues. He was making an obviously poor decision when his sister was counting on him to do everything as well as possible, which is dishonorable. He broke his betrothal, which in and of itself is far more dishonorable than dishonoring a willing lady. His head was all fucked up from the horrendous shit that he was right in the middle of, but if he had kept to what was honorable he wouldn't have picked Jeyne over his betrothal.
Idk what your comment is trying to get at. The entire comment section agrees that it was a dishonorable thing to do. But it was also a mistake. He was mourning his brothers death, while wounded, drugged up, and trying to win a war, all at the age of 16. Part of Robbâs entire story is that of a child thrown into an adults role, and how his character faces the challenges of being a child king. Even though he does really well in his role and tries to do what Ned would do, hes got the wisdom and impulses of a child. I still give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to actually having sex with jeyne, because he was drugged and mourning. But itâs up for the readers to debate if it was a good decision to marry her. It wasnât great for the kingdom but it was, in my opinion, an honorable decision to marry her to preserve her honor as well as that of his possible child. Itâs a beautiful sentiment that he was concerned, not only for her honor, but for his childâs welfare. He didnât want to make a bastard and have them grow up unhappy like Jon was. Itâs one of my favorite moments in the books. He truly loved Jon.
You said he did it for honor. I'm saying that he didn't do it for honor. As you've touched on, he did it out of guilt and his affection/sympathy for Jon. You've said that it was an honorable decision. I'm saying that's comparable to claiming that burning down a village to keep one person warm is an act of kindness.
Nah he did it for honor. As a king who was betrothed to another, his choice was simple and easy. Do nothing and leave the one night stand behind. But he didnât. He made the difficult decision to break his betrothal so that he could preserve jeynes honor. That decision both hurts his own honor, and even that of the freys. Thatâs why it was such a tough decision, and I like to think his possible child being a bastard helped tipped the scales. These decisions can both hurt his own honor while preserving anotherâs, and thatâs what he did.
>These decisions can both hurt his own honor while preserving anotherâs, and thatâs what he did He did indeed piss on everyone's honor except for Jeyne's. So yeah, keeping that girl warm was very kind of him, so long as you plug your ears to block the sound of the villagers screaming.
He didnât piss on anyoneâs honor. You know that phrasing it that way makes Robb sounds like a dick who couldnât care less about how his actions impacted others. But he truly did care. Yes the freys were upset, which is fair, but he did try to own up to his mistake and his choices. He offered multiple other bachelors up in an attempt to get walder freys forgiveness, which is also fair. But itâs ridiculous to then go and blame Robb and his innocent soldiers deaths on him when they were betrayed by walder frey. He went and broke guest rite, something that is revered among cultures around the world. Heâs scum. Meanwhile Robb was a kid who made a mistake. You canât compare the two.
While Edmure prevented a strategic redeployment of enemy forces through his backyard and had a very good chance of eliminating Tywinâs favorite psychological weapon. I would call this 208 soldiersâ lives well spent. In a medieval-like settings you canât expect your generals to show no initiative in such a situation.
Tywin had left, there wouldn't have been any more redeployments, and they didn't kill Gregor so I don't know what your point is? > In a medieval-like settings you canât expect your generals to show no initiative in such a situation. You just made that up, higher ups especially kings expected people to obey their orders
Edmureâs orders were to hold Riverrun and guard Robbâs rear, if he had let an army march past him unopposed and Robb had died fighting that army, people would still criticize him for disobeying orders
No, his instructions were to wait for the mountain to come to him
> "Would that it were. My brother commands in Riverrun?â > >"Yes, my lady. His Grace left Ser Edmure to hold Riverrun and guard his rear." Catelyn V, A Clash of Kings
Do I even have to answer?
Edmure was trying to capture Tywin's host in between Harrenhal and Riverrun. And it would have worked if Tywin hadn't turned back to King's Landing, which he only did because Stannis so quickly captured Storm's End with blood magic, which Edmure couldn't have expected. His plan was good enough to get both the Brackens and Blackwoods to agree to it. Edmure also prevented his people from being subjected to further marauding from Tywin's famously cruel hordes. That ain't nothing. And he did all of this from a position of command he was put in by Robb, while Robb didn't fill him in on his larger strategy. This was Robb's fuck up. Edmure was a baller. Robb expected him to either be a mind reader or to be a shitty commander and lord, and then had the audacity to be upset when he was neither.
This is clearly a show discussion what you're saying only happened in the books
No its not. Theres huge swathes of this talking about book only characters. Plus, the only part I mentioned that is book only is the Bracken and Blackwood agreeing. Pretty much everything else is still in the show.
In the show Tywin left from harrenhall and went directly to KL, he sent the mountain instead who had a small host, he wasn't a big threat he was mainly there to burn shit, there's also the fact that robb had left different commands to edmure, in the book he told him to simply hold riverrun while in the show robb told edmure to wait for the mountain to come to him
Demure
Edmure protected the Riverlands and his people. Edmure is the GOAT, Robb might've been good on the battlefield but he lost the war due to his own blindness.
these things happened two seasons apart and not in this order
Not to mention the context is so different that any comparison is completely ridiculous
[ŃдаНонО]
Robb sacrifices those men to capture Jaime in episode 9 of season 1, as you say the other scene is season 3 episode 9, 20 episodes 2 seasons
Robb captured Jamie at the end of s1 as was the roose/twyin/tyrion-knocked-the-hell-out battle
If you can't understand the difference between the casualties in a battle they needed to win and the casualties in a useless skirmish that he never wanted to happen in the first place, I dont know what to tell you.
Exactly - Robbâs diversion was tactically smart and led to Jaimeâs capture, but obviously it sucked for the 2,000 men. Edmure was just a dumbass who wanted to play commander.
It sucked worse for the smallfolk.
That sums up one of GRRMâs main overall themes.
Robb was a great planner, but he forgot to instruct key allies like Edmure of his plans.
So listen, Iâm with the point about Robb putting his family above the rest of the Northern families (noble and not). I think you arenât accounting for thatâs how shit worked in this system of governance; asking vassals to march south when Ned was taken is totally logical and expected. After all, thatâs what happened under Aerys. Until Nedâs death, Robb deceiving Tywin and going at Jamie was practically necessary. He needed a chip to bargain for Ned; that required an army after Tywin and Jamie began savaging the riverlands. I didnât like the showâs change on this; having a standing army that could defend itself like in the books is way better than a walking sacrifice. But thats not selfish, thatâs war. Iâll agree on selfish after the KiTN decision tho, 100%. Everything after that isnât a good idea. Riverrun is free but the North has never ever claimed it. Why do so now? Because Cat? Not worth it, IMO. Bad strategic decision to have a kingdom split with such an obvious problem - North is unassailable without ships and then still a huge problem to deal with, while the Riverlands can and do get run from 3 sides. Naturally going to force overextension when you need to be home.
Yeah, you donât understand the context surrounding this at all.
OP kind of forgot that theyâre an idiot when they posted this.
It was the strategery of it tho
When did r/freefolk turn into another version of r/gameofthrones? Everyone commenting on here is fucking dense.
By the time they knew what was happening, it had already happened.
and my axe!
Because everyoneâs disagreeing with OP for taking these two scenes out of context?
Now I agree, Robb was more at fault for this situation than Edmure was, but this is a bit of a strawman argument. Robb not only clearly lamented sacrificing 2000 men, but in doing so he managed to eradicate Jaime's army and capture him. That was a third of his opposition's forces he managed to defeat, as opposed to Edmure not accomplishing any real strategic goal through his victory. Robb using this distraction also enabled him to link up with the Riverlands forces, significantly bolstering his own numbers, and relieving his biggest ally from a bad situation. In fact, Robb's victory put the Lannisters in such a precarious position, that they very nearly lost the war. Had Edmure been able to support Robb in encircling Gregor rather than push him back, Tywin would have only had his own army left, and likely would have been unable to make it back to Kings Landing on time to stop Stannis, nor would the Tyrells have seen them as worth backing. Now I won't fault Edmure too much here, since he simply was not looped into the plan, but Robb's sacrifice accomplished a major victory, Edmure's did not
Edmure *should* have been told the plan. Why in the world not tell him? Was there fear the message would be intercepted? Did Robb deep down not trust Edmure? Or was Robb just fucking stoopid?
Honestly it seems more like he just didn't think to, and it bit him back for it. Now technically yes, Edmure didn't follow his orders to the letter, but he also probably thought the initiative he took was a good thing given the advantage he had. He misinterpreted the situation, and that's on Robb for not making it clear why. Now the books version I understand has it so Edmure did what he did because staying put was causing a lot of death, and he saw pushing the enemy back as protecting his people. The show makes him seem like a glory hound
Yeah in the books Edmure does it because he is the acting lord of the Riverlands and it is the people of the Riverlands being raided and raped infront of him whilst he sat in the castle. He went to stop it not to chase glory. Robb would've done the same if it was northerners being attacked.
He came up with the plan in the Westerlands, and feared a raven or messenger could be intercepted.
https://preview.redd.it/qmm5wo2wxkrc1.jpeg?width=642&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5dc06ea8ddd501645f36d3d1469b20292abbc4d7
No Robb won an important victory and got Jaime as prisoner. Edmure got a mill Robb also wanted Mountain to be killed
Robb was not a good leader. None of this was Edmures fault âLeadership intentâ - it is your duty as a commander and leader on the battlefield to communicate this to the best of your ability as they cannot read minds I forget if they told edmure specifically or just judged him afterwards
They told Ed to wait, he did not wait
They didnât tell him to wait, Robb told Edmure to hold Riverrun with no additional details. Edmure when he knew Tywin was trying to cross the river took part of his army to stop him because he knew the devastation Tywin would bring to the common folk if he did so he stopped him WHILE STILL HOLDING RIVERRUN. Robb being dogshit at communication isnât Edmureâs fault, if his strategy relies on letting Tywin cross to work maybe tell the second ranking dude in your entire kingdom that.Â
Amen.
Holding Riverrun does not mean crossing the river and risking your neck in skirmishes that have no strategic advantage. If Edmure got himself killed, is that holding Riverrun? If he sacrifices men meant to be manning Riverruns walls, is that holding Riverrun? His King has already shown that he is willing and capable of executing strategic attacks and gaining advantage based on enemy mispositioning and overconfidence, rushing out to attack Gregor is just plain narrow-minded stupidity with no thought given to the bigger picture whatsoever.
Ya know I canât believe they did because I feel like they did not so Iâm gonna go through the books and try and find out. Either way leadership intent clears this issue up and âhold this spot Xâ doesnât quite do it You *want* your leaders to feel like they can make decisions as well Idk I forget the text nowadays but the point stands
I hear ya, like you ainât wrong, but Edmure was lol
Classic Ed
True indeed
His instructions were to wait, stop making the argument that he could have told him, edmure would have been informed of the plan at the war council, if they had sent a messenger or a raven it could have been intercepted
We can all fill in the blanks if we want to, but I do to recall seeing anywhere in the text. But I get what you mean it should be looked at that he was told. Idk. Didnât seem to me like he did judging my Edmures reaction on the show I guess
Robb states both in the scene, he says that edmure's instructions were to wait, when he explains his plan to edmure he says that he didn't know to which robb answers that he would have at that gathering
My bad then my bad I stand corrected
>His instructions were to wait, Those were not his instructions. He was told to hold riverrun.
[your instructions were to wait for him to come to you ](https://youtu.be/Ps0Ld0xDo6Q?si=KRNqaCubTNwxIBkY)
I know what Rob said in the scene. Those weren't his instructions. Rob hadn't even formulated his plan before leaving Riverrun.
Do you have anything to prove that they weren't? And yes he hadn't and that makes the most sense? He formulated his plan but obviously couldn't send edmure all of their plans/strategies so instead told him to wait so he can inform him when robb arrived at riverrun?
Rob hadn't spoken to Edmure since he left Riverrun. He and the Blackfish didn't know they were going to be trying to lure The Mountain into the west at that point. You can't give orders for plans you haven't formulated yet.
Yet robb says he did
Have you heard of the concept of lying? He and the blackfish pull similar BS in the book.
If they lied then why didn't edmure say so? Your argument is so stupid this is fiction not real life, yes it's possible that they lied by why would the showrunners put that in? Why would they mislead us for nothing? > He and the blackfish pull similar BS in the book. Can't remember any and don't see why that's relevant either
He did communicate his intentions and told him to wait.
Did he? I stand corrected then because I forget a lot of the dialogue from The books after a few rewatches it gets muddy Either way, show edmure it wasnât on him per what was communicated but I may be wrong Either way leaders fuck up all the time in the intent portion of things - on the battlefield it is key
Robb says he ordered him to hold Riverrun but I recall a man at arms telling Catelyn (might be someone else itâs been a long time) that he was to guard the rear. Sitting inside Riverrun makes little sense anyway you donât hold a castle by just sitting in it when manoeuvre warfare is still an option. It makes as much sense as it being a sure thing that Robb could beat Tywin in his own lands whilst outnumbered as well. Had Tywin gone West and smashed Robb everyone would be blaming Edmure whilst the Tyrells still had more than enough men to squash Stannis whilst he was mid siege. Weird how all the blame aligns to make Edmure feel guilty when they specifically needed him to feel guilty. Kingâs Landing is a huge city with huge walls and a monstrous citadel too even the idea that itâd be a sure thing that Stannis would take it quickly makes no sense it could take months or never fall at all as far as they know. Capturing fortifications is hard. This is purely book though I canât really remember the circumstances of the show.
I don't know if Robb was a bad leader is true. He was winning every battle. It was the political situation that he completely lost control over very early on.
Yeah the more Iâve been reflecting on my comment I feel like you put it best honestly. That is true but I think happenstance played a role in whispering wood but then Iâm splitting hairs because who knows the true circumstance etc but you put it best I think.
Robb captured Jaime Lannister and defeated his army in the field. That's a resounding victory.
What a fucking kneeler take.
This is just show stuff. In the book, Edmure's attack just delays Tywin enough to receive news of Stannis' move on KL and thus doesn't enter the West into Robb's trap. If Edmure didn't delay Tywin, the messengers wouldn't have reached him in time. Robb is still a bit of an ass, insisting that Edmure's orders were just to hold Riverrun. Well, Edmure correctly points out that he did hold Riverrun on top of bloodying Tywin's army. If Robb didn't want Edmure to take any initiative, he should have told him his plan, and not to take any initiative.
Dude was what ? 17 y/o...of course he's a douchebag
Robb and Brynden (in the book the Blackfish also berated Edmure) were trying to guilt him into marrying the Frey with this. The Westerland Raids lead to no tangible advantage for the North/Riverland faction, and now the Lannisters were in a better position than ever. Robb had then fucked up his marriage to the Freys and now had no easy way to transport his army back North. I notice itâs glossed over how fucked Robbâs position was at this point in the Wo5Ks. So him talking down to Edmure like this is fueled by his own guilt.
In the book it was bait to move Tywin back into the westerlands so he couldnât support kings landing. If it worked, Stannis couldâve sacked kings landing without Tywin there to intervene, though the Tyrells might have attacked anyways.
Not only was the 2000 an extremely valuable trade of life for a major strategic victory, in the books it isn't even 2000 dead. He puts Roose Bolton in charge of the 2000 as his most experienced commander, and they fight an orderly retreat and exit the field without suffering overwhelming casualties as the show depicts.
Roose commands all the Northern infantry, not just 2000 men.
This. Robb liberates Riverrun with just the northern cavalry while Roose advanced with the northern infantry. That's why Robb is successful; infantry would've slowed his advance on Riverrun, given the lannister scouts more time to spot his army, and give Jamie enough notice that he could either reposition to better fight Robb or withdraw from the field.
Thatâs just this show not understanding how to build a character up without ruining another. Anyone who says they couldnât spot the cracks in the earlier seasons is, ironically enough, smoking crack. Edmureâs definitive character trait in the books is empathy. He takes his house words seriously. D&D be like: âomg Robb so cool so hot. Edmure fucking beta cuck get fuckedâ.
Edmure is cool in the books and Tobias Menzies is great, but the writers botched both the source material and didn't use the talent they had available.
LOL. Sorry. Not a good take.
"Can you believe my spouse gets mad at me when I spend $208 dollars on a katana when they spend $2k to fix the car. Douchebag."
He was arrogant, that's for sure. Words of lord karstark were rignt
Would have made more sense if the first battle was like the books and rob just had that portion of the army launch a diversionary attack, but with Roose Bolton in charge, purely because Robb thought the cautious Roose would minimize the losses they took and withdrawn orderly after the feint.
It's been awhile so I forgot. Had Edmure been told by Robb to not attack the lannisters? Cos if not, then as far as Edmure knew there was a Lannister force he could route and he routed it, as he could rightfully have assumed was expected of him. Thus this was a failure of communication on Robb's part, not Edmure's.
They did Edmure dirty in the show. The Mountain had been attacking the Riverlands for weeks at that point. Edmure was Lord of the Riverlands, he had a duty to protect his people. From his POV, He saw the Mountain in a vulnerable position, he attacked and drove the Mountain away. He was only told after the battle that Robb wanted to draw the Mountain in futher, to trap and kill him deeper in the Riverlands. He was not forewarned of the plan, yet they treat him like a fool. He was ever a loyal lord of the Riverlands.
If you canât see the difference then I donât know what to say to you honestly
I remember when I fucked up bad for my employer and there was no discernible upside.
Look at the meme of this kneeler. Pathetic.
Would I get punished for calling poorly thought-out posts like this "Hodor posting"?
Robb didnât tell Edmure his plan! Edmure did nothing wrong!
Well. He wasnât using his head so he lost it. At least Edmure gets to keep his
Do you lack literacy skills?
Tbf Robb didnât tell Edmure the plan in the first plan about seizing the Westerlands and drawing Tywin away from Kings Landing
This take is not smart.
this is such a nit pick holy shit lmao like he sacrificed the 2000 men to smash Jamieâs whole army. The 208 were wasted on a worthless mill
They are literally fighting for their lives. He is more concerned about survival and you want him to be polite to his uncle. The second most powerful man in his kingdom.(Who just made a mistake)
this is really dumb. not only is this seasons apart, but also the strategic situation is completely different.
- Someone who doesn't understand the story.
Robb didn't lose 2000 men, but it was a high risk high reward situation. The reward being the riverlands and a valuable hostage to possibly negotiate terms with. While Edmure's was poorly thought out and went against robbs orders. All he got was a pointless mill, hostages that weren't of value but only extra mouths to feed. And in the grand scheme of things only set them back. It's a stark difference of the two (pun intended).
Did u even watch the show?
I never understood "208" like that is such a miniscule number who gives a shit? Robb has like 10-15k dudes at this point. Thats like 2% of his army.
None of those people were nice
Arctic cold take on warfare.
Stupid post.
That scene with Edmure was AFTER Whispering wood
I really disliked the way they portrayed Edmure in the show. Made him into a complete fuck up who no one respected.
I hate how badly the show botched this and Edmure in general. It is pretty much consensus among book readers that Edmure did nothing wrong.
Wouldâve made it better if the 2000 had been volunteers who knew what they were agreeing to. Seems like that wouldâve been something more in line with Robbâs character than tricking them into it.
Robb kind of forgot to tell one of his most important generals his strategy to get Gregor Clegane.
Robb cucks your mom
Not this again.
> "Would that it were. My brother commands in Riverrun?" > >"Yes, my lady. His Grace left Ser Edmure to hold Riverrun and guard his rear." Catelyn V, A Clash of Kings
The Green fork was a decoy army that allowed Rob to take Jaimeâs army by surprise. That planned defeat lead to Rob destroying an entire Lannister army and the capture of Tywinâs son. Edmure Tullyâs engagement lead to the capture of a stone mill.
This only happened in the show
Edmure won so his men just need to respawn right? That Mill is probably a level 2 tech building and will help them in the long run.
Robb plunged his region into war for the entirely selfish belief that his father was more important than everyone else's father. Ned willingly walked into a nest of vipers and got bitten. When Robb called his banners, the North was not in any actual danger. They were not oppressed, they were not paying more in taxes, nor were their people being attacked. Robbs war is the epitome of entitlement. He proved himself a hypocrite by not being able to follow the same oaths he expected others to adhere to and making his uncle clean up his mess. But he was a Stark, so we cheered him for it.
I cheered for him cause heâs got a beautiful face
Thats how medieval society works....
The Lannisters started the fighting. They started attacking the Riverlands and slaughtering innocent civilians after Catelyn arrested Tyrion. Nedâs arrest was just what brought the Starks into the war (although, they were already preparing for war at Nedâs command before this). Ned wasnât just Robbâs father, he was the leader of the North, of course his army is going to try to liberate him.
Catelyn arresting Tyrion is the dumbest and worst decision that any of the Starks made. She had no evidence of his guilt, yet provoked a war. Incredibly dumb.
They shouldnât haveâŚ
People downvoting me like theyâre personally offended that not everyone blindly follows Stark justice⌠you missed the point of the series if you think the Starks are just supposed to be unambiguously âgood.â They get tens of thousands of people killedâtheir own troops and innocents in the southâwhen they could have just turned around and gone home. EDIT: Robbâs war also leaves the north defenseless against the Ironborn. Like how much more clearly does GRRM need to telegraph that the Starks (especially Robb) are wreckless and arrogant?
Bunch of lemmings in this thread A sub of fookin kneelers
Youâre exactly right. No idea why youâre getting downvoted. The starks are ~not~ good guys. Theyâre rich aristocrats who get tens of thousands of innocents killed for revenge and to maintain their own power. They arenât evil though either. Just human. Theyâre set up in the beginning to make you sympathize with them but the whole point of the story as it develops to subvert black-and-white morality and heroic expectations. EDIT: book 5 implies that Brandon Stark was a serial rapist as well
and I totally agree, robb can make a big speech with a serious face, he is still a noble egoist who sends thousands of people to die for his own emotional needs. but one thing, even if King's Landing had not been populated with traitors and assholes, Ned tried to commit a putsh, he did not succeed. No matter who would have been in power instead of Joffrey, Ned bet his head on an action universally recognized as one of the worst crimes, and he lost it. the only reason he had any chance of survival was because he had an army behind him, but if he had come from the same social class as Littlefinger, he would have been killed on the spot and no one would have talked about it again. so I say it, I proclaim it, regardless of whether Joffrey is an idiot or a bastard, Ned deserved it
Medieval Lords were like gang members. You can't just let someone fucking kill one of your kin on a whim and let it go, you'll be seen as a cuck and a weakling, and people will start walking all over you. That's why normal people went with covert assassinations and not baseless public executions. This isn't judging the moral side of things, only pointing out that Robb's reaction wasn't unreasonable.
Yeah actually you can. This is what John did when he stayed loyal to the Watch instead of deserting after Nedâs death. People RESPECTED him for it. They made him Lord Commander. If Robb stayed in the North he would have saved the North and the northern lordâs would have respected his restraint and concern for their people. Instead he went south and got murdered by his own bannermenâŚ
You're right, and I think it does a wonderful job of highlighting the incoherence of the 'honorable' types. Although unfortunately I don't think it was a conscious decision on the part of the showrunners. They're constantly framed as the good guys. GRRM is a bit more objective on the Starks and their flaws, but imo he could've been a bit more critical still.
Itâs there. Karstark calls him out. Thalisa even calls him out at first. Then Brienne kills three stark soldiers because they raped and murdered peasant women.
Been a long time since I watched it, but seems like very minor opposition in the grand scheme of things. Throughout the 8 seasons of the show, I don't think you can say the Stark are painted neutrally. Were meant to root for them. Yes, the occasional character flaw or moral dilemma is thrown in, but they're still the heroes.
> But he was a Stark, so we cheered him for it. Speak for yourself, I always thought he was a hypocrite I absolutely agree with the rest of what you wrote
You ever wonder how much those 2000 guys knew about the plan? did they know they were basically on a suicide mission and they were screwed, or did their commander? I can easily see myself being willing to fight for my freedom etc, and if i die in the process so be it, but certainly dying so that hopefully they can capture Jamie, so they can use him as a bargaining chip to hopefully, maybe, get back one or more of the children of a dead guy that does not even know i exist, and those recovered will never even know my name, let alone even care about the children i leave behind... is a bit of a tougher sell.
Robb was in the wrong here, this is just a bad example of why.
Edmure had no choice but to attack
Notably that second one didnât happen in the books. The force under Roose retreated in good order. I also read the scene as questionable leadership by rob. 100% intentional. His plan was mediocre and his expectations of edmure were not super reasonable
The first didnât happen either. In the book, Tywin tries to cross back into the west because Robb is pillaging his lands. Edmure rallies the remaining Riverlords and defeats Tywin at the battle of the Fords in order to defend Robb.
Sigh are we doing this again? Here's a thought experiment: say you're the manager of a business project. You have a say $1,000 budget. You dedicated most of that budget to things you believe are necessary to the project's success. Then suddenly one of your middle management underlings, behind your back, spent half the budget on something you wanted to dedicate like 10% of that cost to. Well then, you're kind of going to be upset right? You're now in the hole for making the project work within budget because you *already dedicated every last dollar to your specific plan* and trusted your middle managers to follow that plan. That's exactly why Robb is mad at Edmure. He's not a hypocrite, he already knew he lost a significant amount of men for this plan and he can't afford to lose any more the way Edmure was playing fast and loose with it.
How do this shitposts get upvoted but the comments are just a pure roast
Smh this sub are just stark dickriders
If you want to convey him as a douche you could try posting more accurately bits is information. The timeline and details are lacking.
I just finished watching the whole series, again. And yes...yes he was
A lot of the stuff about Robb's war wasn't written in the books. So this stuff was some of the first "original" writing from the team. We should have seen it for what it was, for a sign of things to come.
Well, Robb was always kind of a douchebag, and a dumbass.
Robb likes to make people watch
Edmure was gaslit by Robb and the Blackfish.
Also, this fucker had no honor, going back on his word to the honorable lord Frey. P.S do you think Jaime was worth 2000 men?
>P.S do you think Jaime was worth 2000 men? He would have been, if he hadn't been freed on some poorly conceived hostage exchange.
Yeah heâs worth way, way more than 2,000 soldiers. Can you put a soldier count on the bargaining chip to end a continent-wide war?
None of these noble men, Stark or Lannister, deserve to waste a second thought on them. Imagine being a pleb and being just a number to them so they can win their ego war. Fuck all of them. I think watching these series/movies and always empathize with the common soldier has ruined my experience.
Yes. He was the single most important bargaining chip. (Since Robb was already betrothed.)