Didn't house forrester still win
Ramsay said who ever died first lose so that will mean if Rodrik killed lord Whitehill then they won right
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Ramsay said who ever died first lose so that will mean if Rodrik killed lord Whitehill then they won right
Comments
Yeah but Whitehills don't play fair.
Well, with this logic Forresters already lost in Season 5, if Rodrick stayed behind (Even Ludd declared this to Asher).
Ludd's death secures no victory - Gryff takes control of the Whitehill army right after his father's death.
Uhhh, no not at all. To quote Ramsay "Last House standing, wins". The Forrester's lost their home, their people, and whatever stake they had in this war. It doesn't matter if Ludd is the one to die, Gryff lives regardless in that case and naturally will take his father's place. And seeing as how the Lord had to flee as well as any remaining Forrester forces from their House, there's no way it can be seen that the Forresters somehow won. We got some payback, but we still lost everything in the end.
But didn't Ludd say with rodrik dead he already won
Hmmm... maybe Season 2 will focus on reclaiming Ironrath from Whitehill control?
He said that. But:
Ramsay declared: "Last House standing, wins", not the Last Lord Standing.
Asher comes right in time and successfully takes a role of a new lord, which blocks Ludd's opinion instead of long arguing about the terms. When Asher declares himself as Lord, Gryff even make a joke of it - that he know already 4 different Lords of House Forrester.
I'm guessing rebuilding the House will be the story of Season 2.
Yup but that's just Ludd trying to pressure Asher into succumbing, that's all. Macropod summed it up very well.
I think the focus would be Asher/Rodrik recovering from their wounds, starts building alliances or reforge alliances since the Forresters did have allies before the Red Wedding and build a new army.