What should Stannis have done different?

had better writers

Each shadow demon ages him like 20 years so using 2 more would probably kill him. And no way Cersei wouldn't suspect him, she would rally the Lannister forces and their allies against him and we're back to where we started.

He should've burned the witch instead of his daughter. No soldier trust a faggot who burns his own spouse

I wonder if Stannis would have been in a better position if he had a son, especially if that son was relatively old.
>No longer would Stannis' reign upon his death likely end up leading to a queenship (and whatever aversion people have to that and issues that would arise from one).
>Marriage opportunities that give way to alliances.
>May add to the case Joffrey is a incest bastard.
>May even give Stannis something close to contentment.
>May mean Selyse doesn't turn into a R'hllor fanatic.
For Stannis to get a son you may need to give him a different wife. Though that in itself seem advantageous.

Pure mind fiction.

Sided with Renly until they had the throne.

Stannis never died on screen, he'll be back in season 9 to take and remould the iron thrown.

>Your Grace, if you are dead
>You will avenge my death, and seat my daughter on the Iron Throne. Or die in the attempt.
>On my honor as a knight, you have my word.

Attached: Stannis-Baratheon-house-baratheon-30161496-1280-720.jpg (1280x720, 56.45K)

Season 3, Episode 3
>Stannis says that he wants her, and that he wants Joffrey and Robb dead, and asks her to make "a son" again with him (like the Shadow-creature she conjured to assassinate Renly). Melisandre says that she cannot: creating a shadow-creature drains some of the fire of a man's life-force, and she fears that creating another would kill Stannis. Over his protests, she explains that what she is seeking is even more powerful than a shadow-creature, and will change his fortunes in this war, but she needs a king's blood to do it. tannis doesn't understand, but Melisandre implies that she needs to burn a human sacrifice who possesses a king's blood as an offering to the Lord of Light. She can't kill Stannis himself to achieve this, but as she points out, "There are others with your blood in their veins" - any of his brother King Robert's bastard children who managed to survive the purge.

really just had his brother not be an uppity little faggot

In the context of the setting GRRM created, there is absolutely zero fucking reason for Renly to get any fucking support
>I should be king because... WELL I JUST SHOULD BE!
Complete load of horseshit. The entire crisis is centered around the rules of inheritance, and yet its somehow supposed to be accepted that Renly can stake a claim despite having literally no right to do so? If the rules of the setting were to be believed, the real inter-Baratheon crisis would have come about when Stannis was on the throne post-lannister removal, when the issue of succession became relevant. THEN there would have been issues with the fact that he is banging a fire witch, and has only a sickly daughter

definitely. shireen's greyscale and his lack of a son very likely weakened public perception of him as a ruler, which is probably why so many storm lords were reluctant to back his claim vs renly or joffrey.

renly should've supported stannis. he had zero claim to the throne other than that he wanted to play king.

melissandre says to davos directly when he accuses her of using demon magic that she dare not draw from stannis's "life fire" any more or it would kill him.

>In the context of the setting GRRM created, there is absolutely zero fucking reason for Renly to get any fucking support
We didn't really see it as much on the show but Renly was supposed to be extremely charismatic and popular.

>but Renly was supposed to be extremely charismatic and popular.
which again supports renly being able to press claim to the throne in a succession crisis w/ stannis' heirs being in a weak position as opposed to how grrm writes it where he can just usurp the established norms.

The entire noble system works on the assumption that everyone follows the standards for inheritance, if someone like renly can gain the throne over his older brother for no other reason than popularity it causes massive issues, as the second sons of the world who otherwise have to wait like renly should have get emboldened and legitimized, which is why Renly never would have had the support he did until the time became more suitable

King Joffrey must create the royal army and put him as their Lord commander.

Well I was talking the book, but 20 years again is your mind fiction as Stannis does not age in the show. Now link me to Cersai knowing about Stannis' magic in the show.

the entire "shadow demon sex" thing being incredibly taxing seems like a cheap plot point at first, until you remember that the series was written by a fat aging nerd for whom the physical act of sex was probably similarly physically taxing

Beyond based and red pilled

Attached: 1649453419970.jpg (624x434, 64.21K)

The witch can't burn...He needs to torture the witch for six days and then rape it

In the books, it's the fact that Stannis only has a female heir and the Tyrell's can manipulate Renly.

Taxes...the real thing

i get that but thats why I think within the context of the politics of the setting the proper move would have been to have the tyrells do the same shit in throwing their weight behind renly, and then have him back stannis so that he can be right in line for when a convienent "accident" can befall stannis.

Obviously GRRM chose not to do this because the chaos of the 5 way civil war is what makes the story move along, but it just doesn't make sense within the rules of the setting for renly to have acted the way he did, with or without tyrell support

>Muh rules
They only matter when it's convenient

how is that a cheap plot point? it's blood magic. it makes sense that it physically harms or drains the person that the shadow demon manifests from. all magic in the series requires sacrifice or blood.

it makes sense for renly's character and the fact that he's bobby b's brother. robert usurped the "rightful" king aerys by all laws of succession in his rebellion, and that didn't matter when half the realm started hating the targs and preferred the baratheons over them. renly was operating on the same logic. obviously this spells disaster for future succession since if every lord or future king operated on rite of conquest then the wars would never end, but that's kinda the point. it isn't unprecedented for the story being told, especially since renly and robert were extremely similar in personality.

>Mine by might
Tyells were in position to put them on the throne under Stannis they would have been a House who bakes bread.

Rules are broken all the time. Politics is bullshit. Winning , getting power, and using it are the only things that matter. You watched Joe Biden get declared more popular than Barack Obama and win an election thanks to truckloads of devoted African Americans who carefully marked their mail-in ballots for ole' Joe so he could win in a stunning upset when the midnight counting came around. That's getting power. Then, you make up whatever plausible bullshit you need to and gaslight the fuck out of everyone with "Trump lost" until the rubes accept it and they're off to believing in "rules"... just like you do.

renly's a cocky cunt, no way he would've allowed stannis to get the throne when he can just get it himself

thats my point, its really, REALLY, inconvenient to set a precendent for 2nd sons to inherit in a feudal realm like westeros, has disastrous long term consequences and leads to lots more wars

the main difference with robert and renly is that aerys broke the "feudal contract" with his actions (burning the starks/arryns alive when they came to king's landing to confront rhaegar over the kidnapping of lyanna) which gives him a sort of justification in his actions

There is nothing similar to justify renly's attempt at the throne. All it has going for it is the backing of the tyrells, which doesn't actually provide any legitimacy
>reee the people don't like you stannis!
isn't enough of a justification to legitimize it. compared to the other claimants
>Stannis is the rightful heir after robert's death, claims cersei's children are bastards born of incest making them illegitimate
>Rob Stark has similar thinking as Robert when he rebelled, with the added layer of a push for independence in the face of a weaker iron throne
>Lannisters(Baratheon) maintain that Cersei's kids are legitimate and they are the rightful rulers
>Iron Islands no longer see themselves bound by the Iron throne now that Robert is dead, essentially a continuation of their earlier rebellion

All (except the iron islanders who are written kind of stupidly as well) have pretty legitimate logic as to why they are doing what they are doing. Renly really sticks out as the odd one in comparison

>which doesn't actually provide any legitimacy
Apart from the biggest army in the kingdom. And again its not about legitimacy Stannis is the rightful heir, but he is old and only has a daughter.

>to set a precendent
I know you desperately want to believe that rules-based order is how all of this works but it really doesn't work that way in reality. In fact, that's kind of one of the central messages of the books.

>Stannis is the rightful heir, but he is old and only has a daughter.
Stannis is only 36

seriously stannisbros, what did renly mean by this

Attached: download-peach-11563251065z6g3i3tsau.png (840x859, 673.02K)

>aerys broke the "feudal contract" with his actions (burning the starks/arryns alive when they came to king's landing to confront rhaegar over the kidnapping of lyanna)
and to the targaryens, the starks/arryns broke that contract by accusing rhaegar of rape and demanding the crown prince's blood, given that the true reality of what actually happened between rhaegar and lyanna still isn't certain.

the point of it all is that power resides where people believe it resides, and each one of the kings in question have their own beliefs at where their claim lies, and have varying degrees of legitimacy behind them based on public support and their allies.

robb never asked or wanted to be king in the north, but had no choice but to take on that role because of his bannermen's support, lest they lose faith in him as a ruler.
joffrey has the most legitimate claim publicly, but is obviously illegitimate, and most of the people in king's landing grow to hate him and his regime.
stannis is robert's rightful heir to a claim that was obtained only by rite of conquest over the previous king, but his words of lannister incest are construed publicly as a lie and are believed or not based on the person in question's like or dislike for joffrey.
renly's claim to the iron throne is unfounded, but so was robert's. but he also has the most active supporters out of any of the five kings, as robert did, which is what made his rebellion successful in the first place. his claim begins with being robert's younger brother, but like he says, his army is what will actually make him king.
balon's claim for independence is the same as robb's, and again is determined purely by rite of conquest.

all of them make varying degrees of sense in a kingdom as unstable as westeros.

Its the middle ages nigga. It wasnt uncommon to die in your 50's

>I will go to my grave thinking of Renly's peach
L-lewd?

this goes against everything this character stood for multiple times over

came here to post EXACTLY this

It's kind of a stupid plot point when you think about it.

Then don't post in the thread, dumbfuck. This is not your personal blog.

Not my problem his character stands for retardation

[teeth grinding audibly]

Bend the knee to Renly, uses the shadow baby, becomes king.

>Didn't want it
>Insisted that he had to have it anyway because it was his right
Was it autism?

imagine marrying a Baratheon princess

Attached: 26230758_768533630017794_6467230225750397810_n.jpg (640x960, 77.68K)

Attached: Baratheon_man-at-arms.jpg (1099x1860, 782.55K)

Attached: 1500678946134.jpg (1280x699, 165.24K)

Firm but fair, no hidden agendas, ego in check. Not autism, but keeping his dead fetus sons in giant glass jars was pretty weird.

lawtism

the dude belives in word of law to unflinching, absurd degree.

if stannis wins how is he gonna deal with the growing dispute between king's men and queen's men?

>absurd

>if he took melissandre to the battle of the blackwater
It would change nothing. I doubt that she could do anything about the fire ship launched into their fleet.
Stannis in s5 should've used Jon to plead with the northern lords who would respect the lord commander of the night watch and Ned's bastard. Not only would that make more sense then trying to get Jon break his vows and destroy the legitimacy of the institution, but would provide Stannis with an actual army instead of untrained mob of the wildlings (which would piss off the northerners too).

Also, Stannis may be a southerner, but Ned gave up his life for him and sure as hell he would be a much more worthy leader than fucking Boltons who massacred or took hostages from Manderlys, Umbers and so on. But I guess they kinda forgot about the Red Wedding.

Attached: 6622175c3e0c45f819e0c9714f447a51.jpg (640x500, 51.4K)

he'll do the right thing

Attached: R'hllor Hungers!.png (1920x1080, 1.9M)