I am a troop? Have I been rallied? I give Gared respect, that's why I have two drawings of him in my room and a poster. I will fight to get Gared respect, I will fight! Because Gared does deserve respect and Rodrik shouldn't be a bitch to him, just because he is related to Duncan doesn't mean shit!
The irony of this is that Rodrik's pretty much in Ludd's position rn - the enemies who have killed his family and taken what's his are living happily ever after. There is some irony in this, don't you think?
Keep in mind, Gared had lost his father, his little sister, his friends. He was sent to the Wall for merely defending himself, had to fight for his life there, and then - desert, meaning he still can get executed for it. He had to watch his lord get killed, a man being flayed alive, people come back from the dead to kill him. Had to fight wildlings, wights & a polar bear, had to deal with survivor's guilt after so many deaths, including a good friend he had to slaughter with his own hands - for this bloody house. And now, having brought help, instead of some form of bloody gratitude for everything he has been through, lost and sacrificed for people who hardly remembered him until he appeared a scene before - he gets told off & is about to learn his last remaining family member has been killed by the man, who has the nerve to blame him for something - while all he's ever done was for his house.
I am not trying to play "whose the bigger victim" game - I'm trying to tell that Gared's been through as much, if not more, as any damn Forrester. And the last thing he deserves is being given attitude & having people vent their spleen on him. That's not what he went all this way for.
TLDR: Somebody needs a good punch to come back to their senses & start appreciating things people do for them - because if taken for granted, those things can very well just disappear one day.
I really shouldn't have forgotten, that it's my Rod who at least tried to be a nice guy - the choice statistic pretty much confirms that mos… moret other people's one was one of my least favorite characters in the game.
Keep in mind at this point Rodrik's had very little sleep, he's just woken up from blood-loss-induced unconsciousness, he's just been told everything he thought he knew was a lie, he's heard his sister is dead, has no home left and all he has to go on is the idea of killing those who took his home from him so they can't do it to anyone else.
In his mind, Elissa is dead (confirmed), Mira is dead, Talia is dead, Ryon is dead, Elaena is dead and all the Whitehills are living happily ever after. He's like right on the verge of complete nervous breakdown. All he's got left is anger and hatred for those who took his home and family from him.
You aren't really comparing Rodrik to Ludd, are you? One is a greedy, traitorous bastard-warmonger that takes pleasure in bullying and enslaving those too weak to resist him, whereas Rodrik had everything and everyone taken from him by those craven traitors. He didn't kill any of Ludd's family (I'm assuming you mean before the events of the game when you say that Ludd had his family killed) nor has Gregor, Ethan, Mira, Asher or Ryon. Yet they have suffered enormous abuse at the hands of Whitehills and for what? For defending their livelihood? For opposing a tyrant? No, simply for being Forrester.
Rodrik has the right to take vengeance when the bastards have taken everything else. Now for Gared - he was sent to the Wall for his own protection, otherwise he would be slaughtered and no one would care. His parents and sister were killed by Whitehill bannermen might I remind you.
including a good friend he had to slaughter with his own hands
He didn't HAVE to. He could just ease his friend's suffering and mercifully kill him. Instead this Gared chose to betray his good friend at the end of his journey and slaughter him. That's pretty distasteful. And I'm not saying this because I hate Gared. I say this because I love Gared and can't watch him becoming a monster. (Yes, in my eyes those who turned to blood magic made a monster out of Gared)
I don't like Rodrik mocking Gared like that, believe me. But I understand his reasons. Duncan was like family, he was Gared's actual family and he has decided to betray them which led to near extinction of House Forrester.
Rodrik is what the Whitehills made him into. Blame them, should you blame anybody.
The irony of this is that Rodrik's pretty much in Ludd's position rn - the enemies who have killed his family and taken what's his are livin… moreg happily ever after. There is some irony in this, don't you think?
Keep in mind, Gared had lost his father, his little sister, his friends. He was sent to the Wall for merely defending himself, had to fight for his life there, and then - desert, meaning he still can get executed for it. He had to watch his lord get killed, a man being flayed alive, people come back from the dead to kill him. Had to fight wildlings, wights & a polar bear, had to deal with survivor's guilt after so many deaths, including a good friend he had to slaughter with his own hands - for this bloody house. And now, having brought help, instead of some form of bloody gratitude for everything he has been through, lost and sacrificed for people who hardly remembered him until he appeared a scene before - he gets told off & … [view original content]
You aren't really comparing Rodrik to Ludd, are you?
I am not comparing the characters, since they are completely different. I am comparing their situations, which are pretty similar. Forresters have killed Ludd's father and brother, stolen their part of the grove, a man that served Thorren Forrester was the reason Karl Whitehill got greyscale and died - and after all that Ludd had to watch Forresters "get their happy ever after", same as Rodrik has to now. So, we can say Forresters have made Ludd into what he is & he had the right to take his vengeance, following this logic.
He didn't HAVE to. He could just ease his friend's suffering and mercifully kill him. Instead this Gared chose to betray his good friend at the end of his journey and slaughter him. That's pretty distasteful. And I'm not saying this because I hate Gared. I say this because I love Gared and can't watch him becoming a monster. (Yes, in my eyes those who turned to blood magic made a monster out of Gared)
I do not for a moment support that choice. I didn't make it & under no circumstances would I ever do it. Cotter's one of the few characters from the game I actually love and I would never do something like that to him.
I'd hate to watch Gared turn into a monster as well - while I do not believe that those who made this choice inevitably end up with their Gared being a monster. Yes, this choice is shitty & I judge it a lot, but I can understand it, not from player's point of view, but in the context of the au, where it's presented like something that just happened, not something we chose - cuz the au can possibly follow only one set of choices, even if not all it's fans made them. Gared was under pressure, had torn loyalties & there was no good way out of that situation for him. I am pretty sure he felt a lot of guilt afterwards.
Here is the thing - I didn't mention that choice because I think it's good. I was just listing the shitty things Gared's been through - including the shit he did himself. Yes, he isn't flalwess and I'm not trying to say he is - but Rodrik's the last person who could possibly have the right to judge him, given why Gared did what he did.
I don't like Rodrik mocking Gared like that, believe me. But I understand his reasons. Duncan was like family, he was Gared's actual family and he has decided to betray them which led to near extinction of House Forrester.
I can see how the betrayal is one of the reasons why Rodrik is on edge & not being nice in general. I do not see how it justifies or is a good reason for him blaming, mocking or directing his anger towards particularly Gared.
You aren't really comparing Rodrik to Ludd, are you? One is a greedy, traitorous bastard-warmonger that takes pleasure in bullying and ensla… moreving those too weak to resist him, whereas Rodrik had everything and everyone taken from him by those craven traitors. He didn't kill any of Ludd's family (I'm assuming you mean before the events of the game when you say that Ludd had his family killed) nor has Gregor, Ethan, Mira, Asher or Ryon. Yet they have suffered enormous abuse at the hands of Whitehills and for what? For defending their livelihood? For opposing a tyrant? No, simply for being Forrester.
Rodrik has the right to take vengeance when the bastards have taken everything else. Now for Gared - he was sent to the Wall for his own protection, otherwise he would be slaughtered and no one would care. His parents and sister were killed by Whitehill bannermen might I remind you.
including a good friend he had to slaughter with his own ha… [view original content]
Except that was Thorren's plan that his family would never accept. Gregor himself felt great remorse and never willingly attacked the Whitehills. Can Ludd say the same?
stolen their part of the grove
No, you got that wrong. RECLAIMED part of THEIR grove. "...and your grandfather, Lord Thorren the Bold, who seized back the river valley from the Whitehills." - Ortengryn to Ethan, Episode 1
a man that served Thorren Forrester was the reason Karl Whitehill got greyscale and died
Aye, and Gregor executed him himself. (The whole Greyscale conspiracy seems a little sloppy for me, pretty uneffective way to assassinate someone)
Ludd had to watch Forresters "get their happy ever after"
You mean how most of them were betrayed and slaughtered? There are no happy ever afters in Westeros, unfortunately. Not while men like Ludd or Torrhen hold the reins.
I'm not trying to justify Rodrik's anger towards Gared. I just think you judge him too harshly. Like Badger said, lack of sleep and the near extinction of your family would make anybody cranky.
You aren't really comparing Rodrik to Ludd, are you?
I am not comparing the characters, since they are completely different. I am co… moremparing their situations, which are pretty similar. Forresters have killed Ludd's father and brother, stolen their part of the grove, a man that served Thorren Forrester was the reason Karl Whitehill got greyscale and died - and after all that Ludd had to watch Forresters "get their happy ever after", same as Rodrik has to now. So, we can say Forresters have made Ludd into what he is & he had the right to take his vengeance, following this logic.
He didn't HAVE to. He could just ease his friend's suffering and mercifully kill him. Instead this Gared chose to betray his good friend at the end of his journey and slaughter him. That's pretty distasteful. And I'm not saying this because I hate Gared. I say this because I love Gared and can't watch him becoming a monster. (Yes, in my eyes those who t… [view original content]
Can I just say THIS DISCUSSION is the sort of thing I started the AU up for. I'm really happy to finally see people get into such passionate debates : D
(The whole Greyscale conspiracy seems a little sloppy for me, pretty uneffective way to assassinate someone)
It is a bit, I'll admit it. Some stuff comes out that way because I have to tie together multiple plot points to sort of fill the gaps telltale left us (this being a) why ortengryn was only around for 3 years, b) karl's death, c) something to do with Thorren). I don't claim to be a professional writer of any kind, but I suppose it's kind of in Thorren's personality to go for the most painful option of biological warfare which could potentially also be spread around highpoint extremely quickly if no one took notice, but that's just me - the guy who wrote it.
There are no happy ever afters in Westeros, unfortunately. Not while men like Ludd or Torrhen hold the reins.
Forresters have killed Ludd's father and brother
Except that was Thorren's plan that his family would never accept. Gregor himself f… moreelt great remorse and never willingly attacked the Whitehills. Can Ludd say the same?
stolen their part of the grove
No, you got that wrong. RECLAIMED part of THEIR grove. "...and your grandfather, Lord Thorren the Bold, who seized back the river valley from the Whitehills." - Ortengryn to Ethan, Episode 1
a man that served Thorren Forrester was the reason Karl Whitehill got greyscale and died
Aye, and Gregor executed him himself. (The whole Greyscale conspiracy seems a little sloppy for me, pretty uneffective way to assassinate someone)
Ludd had to watch Forresters "get their happy ever after"
You mean how most of them were betrayed and slaughtered? There are no happy ever afters in Westeros, unfortunately. Not while men like Ludd or Torrhen hold the reins.
I… [view original content]
Thorren's that big of a crook eh? Old cunt. So why does he hate the Whitehills to such extent? I assume the loss of someone dear? Surely a stern Stark loyalist wouldn't be so rotten? Or would he? Ha, what does it matter, he's dead and unimportant now. I really admire your work, it's been... inspiring to say the least. May your days be long and your mind sharper than any sword.
Can I just say THIS DISCUSSION is the sort of thing I started the AU up for. I'm really happy to finally see people get into such passionate… more debates : D
(The whole Greyscale conspiracy seems a little sloppy for me, pretty uneffective way to assassinate someone)
It is a bit, I'll admit it. Some stuff comes out that way because I have to tie together multiple plot points to sort of fill the gaps telltale left us (this being a) why ortengryn was only around for 3 years, b) karl's death, c) something to do with Thorren). I don't claim to be a professional writer of any kind, but I suppose it's kind of in Thorren's personality to go for the most painful option of biological warfare which could potentially also be spread around highpoint extremely quickly if no one took notice, but that's just me - the guy who wrote it.
There are no happy ever afters in Westeros, unfortunately. Not while men like Ludd or Torrhen hold the reins.
Also fuckin' White Walkers, haha.
So why does he hate the Whitehills to such extent?
Something to do with his father being tricked into a "peace making" marriage with a Warrick Bastard posing as a Whitehill daughter. Said Warrick bastard was his mother and abused him as a child while his father was distant. There's sort of a cycle of abuse there, but it's no excuse.
Thorren was pretty much born a cunt. As our dear friend Ser Bronn of the Blackwater once said, there's no cure for that.
Thorren's that big of a crook eh? Old cunt. So why does he hate the Whitehills to such extent? I assume the loss of someone dear? Surely a s… moretern Stark loyalist wouldn't be so rotten? Or would he? Ha, what does it matter, he's dead and unimportant now. I really admire your work, it's been... inspiring to say the least. May your days be long and your mind sharper than any sword.
Except that was Thorren's plan that his family would never accept. Gregor himself felt great remorse and never willingly attacked the Whitehills. Can Ludd say the same?
Gregor feeling remorse didn't exactly mend or change a thing. On the other hand - we have Gwyn, who felt remorse for the Forresters as well, but is still hated as "guilty by association" by many. Same way as Torrhen's descendants, in fact.
No, you got that wrong. RECLAIMED part of THEIR grove. "...and your grandfather, Lord Thorren the Bold, who seized back the river valley from the Whitehills." - Ortengryn to Ethan, Episode 1
The game doesn't give us any exact information on the matter - "seized back" could be just poor phrasing, based on Ortengryn's false assumption that ironwood groves inherently belong to the Forresters by some reason. I follow au's canon, which says that Whitehill's part of the grove was stolen from them.
Aye, and Gregor executed him himself.
Again, this doesn't exactly change anything. Not to mention that if I was Ludd, I would not only blame the Forresters for not preventing their maester from doing something like that, but think that they are just covering their tracks & putting all the blame on one man, making up a story about him acting on his own will & not their orders to avoid responsibility, now that their plan failed.
You mean how most of them were betrayed and slaughtered?
I mean, how for years before the game's events Forresters didn't face any consequences of stealing Whitehill's groves & killing them.
Forresters have killed Ludd's father and brother
Except that was Thorren's plan that his family would never accept. Gregor himself f… moreelt great remorse and never willingly attacked the Whitehills. Can Ludd say the same?
stolen their part of the grove
No, you got that wrong. RECLAIMED part of THEIR grove. "...and your grandfather, Lord Thorren the Bold, who seized back the river valley from the Whitehills." - Ortengryn to Ethan, Episode 1
a man that served Thorren Forrester was the reason Karl Whitehill got greyscale and died
Aye, and Gregor executed him himself. (The whole Greyscale conspiracy seems a little sloppy for me, pretty uneffective way to assassinate someone)
Ludd had to watch Forresters "get their happy ever after"
You mean how most of them were betrayed and slaughtered? There are no happy ever afters in Westeros, unfortunately. Not while men like Ludd or Torrhen hold the reins.
I… [view original content]
Can I just say THIS DISCUSSION is the sort of thing I started the AU up for. I'm really happy to finally see people get into such passionate debates : D
Hey, it's always nice to know we can at least make Badger happy for all the swell stuff he does that we enjoy .D
Can I just say THIS DISCUSSION is the sort of thing I started the AU up for. I'm really happy to finally see people get into such passionate… more debates : D
(The whole Greyscale conspiracy seems a little sloppy for me, pretty uneffective way to assassinate someone)
It is a bit, I'll admit it. Some stuff comes out that way because I have to tie together multiple plot points to sort of fill the gaps telltale left us (this being a) why ortengryn was only around for 3 years, b) karl's death, c) something to do with Thorren). I don't claim to be a professional writer of any kind, but I suppose it's kind of in Thorren's personality to go for the most painful option of biological warfare which could potentially also be spread around highpoint extremely quickly if no one took notice, but that's just me - the guy who wrote it.
There are no happy ever afters in Westeros, unfortunately. Not while men like Ludd or Torrhen hold the reins.
Also fuckin' White Walkers, haha.
That was definitely my favourite part so far! It's great to see Gared stand up to Rodrik like that. I still love Rodrik though. I just love the tension.
When Gared was all "You killed the only family I had left.You..." I was all "Yes, yes...?"
You're clearly bent on demonizing the Forresters while making the Whitehills seem innocent. I said Gregor and the rest of his family condemned what Torrhen did and they never attacked the Whitehills. Gwyn justified her family's atrocities and blindly refused to admit she's in the wrong. How could she, when dominion over the Forresters would greatly benefit her family. She wanted us to accept enslavement for gods sake. Plus she's naive and powerless.
The game doesn't give us any exact information on the matter - "seized back" could be just poor phrasing, based on Ortengryn's false assumption that ironwood groves inherently belong to the Forresters by some reason. I follow au's canon, which says that Whitehill's part of the grove was stolen from them.
Eh no, "seized back" means that the Whitehills took it first, then the Forresters reclaimed it. That actually is canon whether you like it or not.
Also, false assumption? The Forresters and Whitehills both owned Ironwood in the past, only the Whitehills' incompetence and greed forced the Forresters to act and save the Ironwood. Yes it may have been taken from the Whitehills by force, but that's far better than leaving it in the hands of those that would destroy it. AU's canon is still deriving from the game's canon, it only expands it. And the canon is that the Whitehills fucking suck at Ironwooding.
Again, this doesn't exactly change anything. Not to mention that if I was Ludd, I would not only blame the Forresters for not preventing their maester from doing something like that, but think that they are just covering their tracks & putting all the blame on one man, making up a story about him acting on his own will & not their orders to avoid responsibility, now that their plan failed.
Yes well, that assumption would be false.
I mean, how for years before the game's events Forresters didn't face any consequences of stealing Whitehill's groves & killing them.
Retaking. Their. Groves. And there have been many other conflicts between the FORS and the WHTS in the past, we don't know who started it all. From what I've seen of the Whitehills in game, I'd say the answer is clear.
Except that was Thorren's plan that his family would never accept. Gregor himself felt great remorse and never willingly attacked the Whiteh… moreills. Can Ludd say the same?
Gregor feeling remorse didn't exactly mend or change a thing. On the other hand - we have Gwyn, who felt remorse for the Forresters as well, but is still hated as "guilty by association" by many. Same way as Torrhen's descendants, in fact.
No, you got that wrong. RECLAIMED part of THEIR grove. "...and your grandfather, Lord Thorren the Bold, who seized back the river valley from the Whitehills." - Ortengryn to Ethan, Episode 1
The game doesn't give us any exact information on the matter - "seized back" could be just poor phrasing, based on Ortengryn's false assumption that ironwood groves inherently belong to the Forresters by some reason. I follow au's canon, which says that Whitehill's part of the grove was stolen from them.
Aye, and Gregor execut… [view original content]
I said Gregor and the rest of his family condemned what Torrhen did and they never attacked the Whitehills. Gwyn justified her family's atrocities and blindly refused to admit she's in the wrong.
Gregor and the rest of the family disliked what Torrhen did, but accepted the benefits his doings brought them, and none of them considered themselves to be in the wrong for benefitting from other's downfall. Gwyn disliked what her family did, but, in the same manner, accepted the benefits her family got from pushing Forresters (determinantly). What they did was same - except Gwyn actually helped the Forresters.
She wanted us to accept enslavement for gods sake.
Enslavement's a blessing in comparison to house Forrester's state at the end of first season - and given that Gwyn didn't know about the possible help from the North Grove, what she was suggesting was simply a last chance that's been wasted.
Eh no, "seized back" means that the Whitehills took it first, then the Forresters reclaimed it. That actually is canon whether you like it or not.
Again, in this particular discussion I only take into account au's canon & the way it interprets the information given in the game.
Also, false assumption? The Forresters and Whitehills both owned Ironwood in the past, only the Whitehills' incompetence and greed forced the Forresters to act and save the Ironwood. Yes it may have been taken from the Whitehills by force, but that's far better than leaving it in the hands of those that would destroy it. AU's canon is still deriving from the game's canon, it only expands it. And the canon is that the Whitehills fucking suck at Ironwooding.
I beg your pardon, WHAT? Seriously, the fuck? Ironwood's not a damsel in distress. It's not something to be saved. It's not a living being. It's property. Everyone's entitled to doing whatever they please with their property, including wasting it. Or, I don't know - lets justify a thief that steals an item because he knows more about how to take care of it than the original owner? If I have a guitar I can't play & someone who can steals it from me - is he in the right? I'm sorry, but that is ridiculous.
Yes well, that assumption would be false.
False or not, unless proven otherwise, it influences one's view of the Forresters, and not for the better.
You're clearly bent on demonizing the Forresters while making the Whitehills seem innocent. I said Gregor and the rest of his family condemn… moreed what Torrhen did and they never attacked the Whitehills. Gwyn justified her family's atrocities and blindly refused to admit she's in the wrong. How could she, when dominion over the Forresters would greatly benefit her family. She wanted us to accept enslavement for gods sake. Plus she's naive and powerless.
The game doesn't give us any exact information on the matter - "seized back" could be just poor phrasing, based on Ortengryn's false assumption that ironwood groves inherently belong to the Forresters by some reason. I follow au's canon, which says that Whitehill's part of the grove was stolen from them.
Eh no, "seized back" means that the Whitehills took it first, then the Forresters reclaimed it. That actually is canon whether you like it or not.
Also, false assumption? The Forres… [view original content]
Well... let's see. Rodrik just learned his father had bastards that he was never told about, Gared is pissed at Rodrik for killing Duncan, likely not trusting him for a while and now they're all going their separate ways, but Sylvi still has something to tell Rodrik.
Well, on the bright side, there's no Whitehill around to rub it in their faces.
Fuck yes, Gared. I knew you'd stand up for yourself. Splitting like this isn't a good choice though, given that even rolled together, Forrester's forces ain't impressive. Any plan seems dangerous at this point - but I wonder what Sylvi here has to say. If it's something Rod should know, it'll influence the situation, and, hopefully, give the guys a better plan. Anyway, I believe in her - Little Moon will save the day. She's literally the biggest badass of this plotline & it's about time she takes action. They'll probably still split up - but, hopefully, at least with an idea of what to do.
Ok, so tomorrow we'll get a new POV - and I just pray it's Talia, because I'm dying to see her interact with Ebbert. The wish to see it is even stronger than the wish to see Gryff again - & that's something. I'll just cross my fingers & toes.
I just pray it's Talia, because I'm dying to see her interact with Ebbert.
We'll see Talia and Ebbert interact soon, just... don't get your hopes up about it being a direct continuation of where her POV left off. I had plans to make it, but the scene just didn't want to work. Also it's kind of interesting to leave it up to interpretation.
Fuck yes, Gared. I knew you'd stand up for yourself. Splitting like this isn't a good choice though, given that even rolled together, Forres… moreter's forces ain't impressive. Any plan seems dangerous at this point - but I wonder what Sylvi here has to say. If it's something Rod should know, it'll influence the situation, and, hopefully, give the guys a better plan. Anyway, I believe in her - Little Moon will save the day. She's literally the biggest badass of this plotline & it's about time she takes action. They'll probably still split up - but, hopefully, at least with an idea of what to do.
Ok, so tomorrow we'll get a new POV - and I just pray it's Talia, because I'm dying to see her interact with Ebbert. The wish to see it is even stronger than the wish to see Gryff again - & that's something. I'll just cross my fingers & toes.
I said Gregor and the rest of his family condemned what Torrhen did and they never attacked the Whitehills. Gwyn justified her family's atro… morecities and blindly refused to admit she's in the wrong.
Gregor and the rest of the family disliked what Torrhen did, but accepted the benefits his doings brought them, and none of them considered themselves to be in the wrong for benefitting from other's downfall. Gwyn disliked what her family did, but, in the same manner, accepted the benefits her family got from pushing Forresters (determinantly). What they did was same - except Gwyn actually helped the Forresters.
She wanted us to accept enslavement for gods sake.
Enslavement's a blessing in comparison to house Forrester's state at the end of first season - and given that Gwyn didn't know about the possible help from the North Grove, what she was suggesting was simply a last chance that's been wasted.
Eh no, "seized back" me… [view original content]
Ironwood's not a damsel in distress. It's not something to be saved. It's not a living being.
Well... y'know... I mean...
it was.… more..
...that'swhytheforrestersaresogoodatit....imean...thatswhytheironwoodclanbrokeapartinthefirstplacebecausethedudeswhobecamethewhitehillsthoughtwhatmadeironwoodwassuperimmoralandstuff...
Totally fine by me, as long as we see those two interact. In fact, I even believe it's better it doesn't continue Talia's last scene - it'd most likely be just awkward. A lil timeskip is for the best.
I just pray it's Talia, because I'm dying to see her interact with Ebbert.
We'll see Talia and Ebbert interact soon, just... don't g… moreet your hopes up about it being a direct continuation of where her POV left off. I had plans to make it, but the scene just didn't want to work. Also it's kind of interesting to leave it up to interpretation.
Gregor and the rest of the family disliked what Torrhen did, but accepted the benefits his doings brought them, and none of them considered themselves to be in the wrong for benefitting from other's downfall. Gwyn disliked what her family did, but, in the same manner, accepted the benefits her family got from pushing Forresters (determinantly). What they did was same - except Gwyn actually helped the Forresters.
What bloody benefits?! All he accomplished was one Whitehill dying (that they didn't even want to die) and Ludd forever forbidding them from Highpoint. (lol ep 4 contradiction) And what downfall? The Whitehills were left alone and pleaded to. And considering what's happening now, their supposed "downfall" has brought them strength and prosperity. I don't give a shit about Gwyn's "dislike" of her family's actions, I want to see some action. She always bragged to Rodrik about how the bloodshed must stop, when it was HER father and HER family that were responsible for ALL the bloodshed. Aye, she told us of the traitor. But she didn't warn us about the harbor ambush that either costed us Asher, after that her father laid siege to Ironrath and slaughtered dozens of innocent men, women and children OR the ambush costed us Rodrik, to which Gwyn reacted by actually trying to save some lives - the man that stood between her and the love of her life is finally rotting in the ground and we can all forget about what's happened. After we enslave you or kill you. Thanks for the help Gwyn!
Enslavement's a blessing in comparison to house Forrester's state at the end of first season - and given that Gwyn didn't know about the possible help from the North Grove, what she was suggesting was simply a last chance that's been wasted.
Oh maybe you like to live in shit and filth while being fucked in the ass by whitehill bastards, don't forget to thank them for sparing your life! I prefer death to enslavement and disregard for all the men and women that had to die trying to stop these up jumped whoresons.
Again, in this particular discussion I only take into account au's canon & the way it interprets the information given in the game.
Again, in this particular discussion I take in account maester Ortengryn's expertise and information. If he says they retaked their forests, they retaked their forests. And could we stop talking about this? If he took it by force and the Starks didn't intervene then there must've been a good reason for it. Plus this is unimportant and meaningless considering Ludd stole ALL of the frickin' Ironwood.
I beg your pardon, WHAT? Seriously, the fuck? Ironwood's not a damsel in distress. It's not something to be saved. It's not a living being. It's property. Everyone's entitled to doing whatever they please with their property, including wasting it. Or, I don't know - lets justify a thief that steals an item because he knows more about how to take care of it than the original owner? If I have a guitar I can't play & someone who can steals it from me - is he in the right? I'm sorry, but that is ridiculous
You're simply wrong. Do you remember what was said in the game? The Whitehills HAD Ironwood and they nearly destroyed all of it. The Forresters live of Ironwood. Should they just let the Whitehills do whatever they want, not caring that the Whitehills are destroying the only source of wealth that the Forresters have? That would be irrational and stupid. If you're so convinced that the Whitehills have the right to cut every tree they see down, don't be surprised when both of the houses delve into ruins and poverty. And the example you gave is just brilliant. Look, if I set a fire to my house that would spread to the next one, belonging to someone else and it's owner yells at me why I did it, I should just say: "Lol it's mine and I can do whatever the hell I want with it. " I would then end up in jail and my house would be taken from me. Or let's say I have a son. I beat that son and refuse to take care of him. He would be taken from me and I would again end up in prison. That's how things work. If you're a danger to yourself and someone else, measures must be taken to eliminate the danger and its source.
False or not, unless proven otherwise, it influences one's view of the Forresters, and not for the better.
No, it's literally false and nothing more than an assumption. Why should the Forrester care about what Ludd thinks of them anyway? They didn't have any part in the killing of his son. Them or their children should not pay the price for being related to a man who did.
I said Gregor and the rest of his family condemned what Torrhen did and they never attacked the Whitehills. Gwyn justified her family's atro… morecities and blindly refused to admit she's in the wrong.
Gregor and the rest of the family disliked what Torrhen did, but accepted the benefits his doings brought them, and none of them considered themselves to be in the wrong for benefitting from other's downfall. Gwyn disliked what her family did, but, in the same manner, accepted the benefits her family got from pushing Forresters (determinantly). What they did was same - except Gwyn actually helped the Forresters.
She wanted us to accept enslavement for gods sake.
Enslavement's a blessing in comparison to house Forrester's state at the end of first season - and given that Gwyn didn't know about the possible help from the North Grove, what she was suggesting was simply a last chance that's been wasted.
Eh no, "seized back" me… [view original content]
Ludd forever forbidding them from Highpoint. (lol ep 4 contradiction)
To be clear Ludd didn't exactly ban them from going to Highpoint, he said he'd never meet with them again for discussions of peace. He had to go back on himself in Ep4 because his house couldn't work as fast or as well as the Boltons wanted, so he had to swallow his pride and meet with Rodrik.
Gregor and the rest of the family disliked what Torrhen did, but accepted the benefits his doings brought them, and none of them considered … morethemselves to be in the wrong for benefitting from other's downfall. Gwyn disliked what her family did, but, in the same manner, accepted the benefits her family got from pushing Forresters (determinantly). What they did was same - except Gwyn actually helped the Forresters.
What bloody benefits?! All he accomplished was one Whitehill dying (that they didn't even want to die) and Ludd forever forbidding them from Highpoint. (lol ep 4 contradiction) And what downfall? The Whitehills were left alone and pleaded to. And considering what's happening now, their supposed "downfall" has brought them strength and prosperity. I don't give a shit about Gwyn's "dislike" of her family's actions, I want to see some action. She always bragged to Rodrik about how the bloodshed must stop, when it was HER father a… [view original content]
Ironwood business brings some income, doesn't it? Getting more trees = the income increasing.
I don't give a shit about Gwyn's "dislike" of her family's actions, I want to see some action.
Same as it would be nice to see some actions from the Forresters, other than expressing dislike of Thorren's doings. Their only actions ended up in a death of another Whitehill though.
Oh maybe you like to live in shit and filth while being fucked in the ass by whitehill bastards, don't forget to thank them for sparing your life! I prefer death to enslavement and disregard for all the men and women that had to die trying to stop these up jumped whoresons.
Trust me, I would not forget to thank them for all the people who stayed alive rather than getting killed in a war that ended up as enslavement of the remaining ones either way.
If he took it by force and the Starks didn't intervene then there must've been a good reason for it.
I don't even know how to comment this. Yes, sure, we should never question the Starks, they clearly can't be wrong, because... Because reasons, I guess.
Plus this is unimportant and meaningless considering Ludd stole ALL of the frickin' Ironwood.
He simply put house Forrester in the same position they put his house in, by taking all the groves before.
And could we stop talking about this?
Yeah, if you're no longer interested, we can.
The Whitehills HAD Ironwood and they nearly destroyed all of it. The Forresters live of Ironwood. Should they just let the Whitehills do whatever they want, not caring that the Whitehills are destroying the only source of wealth that the Forresters have?
Forresters only source of wealth is their part of the groves. Whitehills destroying parts of the groves that belong to the Whitehills influences Forresters in zero ways.
Look, if I set a fire to my house that would spread to the next one, belonging to someone else and it's owner yells at me why I did it, I should just say: "Lol it's mine and I can do whatever the hell I want with it. " I would then end up in jail and my house would be taken from me.
Fire can spread on other houses. How can Whitehill destroying their groves magically spread on the Forrester's groves?
Or let's say I have a son. I beat that son and refuse to take care of him. He would be taken from me and I would again end up in prison.
Did you not read all of what I said? Your son is a living being with rights. Ironwood, as I've already mentioned, isn't.
They didn't have any part in the killing of his son.
Without proof, this statement doesn't hold any more meaning than the assumption about them being behind it.
Gregor and the rest of the family disliked what Torrhen did, but accepted the benefits his doings brought them, and none of them considered … morethemselves to be in the wrong for benefitting from other's downfall. Gwyn disliked what her family did, but, in the same manner, accepted the benefits her family got from pushing Forresters (determinantly). What they did was same - except Gwyn actually helped the Forresters.
What bloody benefits?! All he accomplished was one Whitehill dying (that they didn't even want to die) and Ludd forever forbidding them from Highpoint. (lol ep 4 contradiction) And what downfall? The Whitehills were left alone and pleaded to. And considering what's happening now, their supposed "downfall" has brought them strength and prosperity. I don't give a shit about Gwyn's "dislike" of her family's actions, I want to see some action. She always bragged to Rodrik about how the bloodshed must stop, when it was HER father a… [view original content]
First, thank you for only replying to small parts of my paragraphs that taken out of the context lose their initial meaning. An example, when I said: "And could we stop talking about this?" I didn't mean everything, just the part where I said that even if Forresters did stole a small part of the Ironwood (which they didn't) it doesn't really matter since Ludd stole ALL of it. He had no right and he disobeyed the Boltons. Still, no one minds. And at least Thorren (assuming he did) conquered it back the old way. Ludd just steals it without a fight.
Same as it would be nice to see some actions from the Forresters, other than expressing dislike of Thorren's doings. Their only actions ended up in a death of another Whitehill though.
Haha, nope. The Forresters executed their own maester for his doings. Even if said maester's actions "benefited" them as you say.
Trust me, I would not forget to thank them for all the people who stayed alive rather than getting killed in a war that ended up as enslavement of the remaining ones either way.
Right, because a prolonged life of slavery and abuse is better than dying like a free man, opposing the tyrants. We need men and women like that. If everyone thought like you do, who would stand up to tyrants like Whitehills?
I don't even know how to comment this. Yes, sure, we should never question the Starks, they clearly can't be wrong, because... Because reasons, I guess.
YES, under Stark rule, peasants and children weren't slaughtered. Under Stark rule, acts of treason and theft were expected to be punished. And under Stark rule, you could question you lord without the fear of being mutilated or flayed.
He simply put house Forrester in the same position they put his house in, by taking all the groves before.
I tire of repeating myself. I'm not sure what you even mean this time. Do you mean when the Ironwood was nearly destroyed under Whitehill rule, which then forced the Forresters to intervene? Even Duncan says they "squandered their share". Or do you mean the river valley's retake? Because in the first case, that happened who knows how long before Ludd was even born so it gives him absolutely no right to make demands. And the second case was already talked to death.
Forresters only source of wealth is their part of the groves. Whitehills destroying parts of the groves that belong to the Whitehills influences Forresters in zero ways.
Oh you can't be serious. If the Whitehills destroyed their parts, they would destroy their source of income thus falling into ruin. They would then start to steal and cut down Ironwood that didn't belong to them. Oh wait, that's exactly what happened!
Fire can spread on other houses. How can Whitehill destroying their groves magically spread on the Forrester's groves?
I just answered that.
Did you not read all of what I said? Your son is a living being with rights. Ironwood, as I've already mentioned, isn't.
Well this was a secondary example I posted, my first being the house fire. Excluding that trees ARE actually living beings (we learned that in biology class) still the Whitehills have no right to just destroy a precious resource just because they can. Especially if that resource is vital to their survival.
Without proof, this statement doesn't hold any more meaning than the assumption about them being behind it.
You want proof? Go check the AU wiki where it says that the only conspirators were Thorren and the maester.
What bloody benefits?!
Ironwood business brings some income, doesn't it? Getting more trees = the income increasing.
I don't g… moreive a shit about Gwyn's "dislike" of her family's actions, I want to see some action.
Same as it would be nice to see some actions from the Forresters, other than expressing dislike of Thorren's doings. Their only actions ended up in a death of another Whitehill though.
Oh maybe you like to live in shit and filth while being fucked in the ass by whitehill bastards, don't forget to thank them for sparing your life! I prefer death to enslavement and disregard for all the men and women that had to die trying to stop these up jumped whoresons.
Trust me, I would not forget to thank them for all the people who stayed alive rather than getting killed in a war that ended up as enslavement of the remaining ones either way.
If he took it by force and the Starks didn't intervene then ther… [view original content]
Comments
That's awesome! I love aggressive Gared.
GaredDefenceSquad
Sign me the fuck up. Gared's been through far too much shit, it's time for us to defend him.
I must rally the troops and ensure Gared is given the respect he deserves!
I am a troop? Have I been rallied? I give Gared respect, that's why I have two drawings of him in my room and a poster. I will fight to get Gared respect, I will fight! Because Gared does deserve respect and Rodrik shouldn't be a bitch to him, just because he is related to Duncan doesn't mean shit!
Here it comes Gared. You are the last of your kind.
The irony of this is that Rodrik's pretty much in Ludd's position rn - the enemies who have killed his family and taken what's his are living happily ever after. There is some irony in this, don't you think?
Keep in mind, Gared had lost his father, his little sister, his friends. He was sent to the Wall for merely defending himself, had to fight for his life there, and then - desert, meaning he still can get executed for it. He had to watch his lord get killed, a man being flayed alive, people come back from the dead to kill him. Had to fight wildlings, wights & a polar bear, had to deal with survivor's guilt after so many deaths, including a good friend he had to slaughter with his own hands - for this bloody house. And now, having brought help, instead of some form of bloody gratitude for everything he has been through, lost and sacrificed for people who hardly remembered him until he appeared a scene before - he gets told off & is about to learn his last remaining family member has been killed by the man, who has the nerve to blame him for something - while all he's ever done was for his house.
I am not trying to play "whose the bigger victim" game - I'm trying to tell that Gared's been through as much, if not more, as any damn Forrester. And the last thing he deserves is being given attitude & having people vent their spleen on him. That's not what he went all this way for.
TLDR: Somebody needs a good punch to come back to their senses & start appreciating things people do for them - because if taken for granted, those things can very well just disappear one day.
You aren't really comparing Rodrik to Ludd, are you? One is a greedy, traitorous bastard-warmonger that takes pleasure in bullying and enslaving those too weak to resist him, whereas Rodrik had everything and everyone taken from him by those craven traitors. He didn't kill any of Ludd's family (I'm assuming you mean before the events of the game when you say that Ludd had his family killed) nor has Gregor, Ethan, Mira, Asher or Ryon. Yet they have suffered enormous abuse at the hands of Whitehills and for what? For defending their livelihood? For opposing a tyrant? No, simply for being Forrester.
Rodrik has the right to take vengeance when the bastards have taken everything else. Now for Gared - he was sent to the Wall for his own protection, otherwise he would be slaughtered and no one would care. His parents and sister were killed by Whitehill bannermen might I remind you.
He didn't HAVE to. He could just ease his friend's suffering and mercifully kill him. Instead this Gared chose to betray his good friend at the end of his journey and slaughter him. That's pretty distasteful. And I'm not saying this because I hate Gared. I say this because I love Gared and can't watch him becoming a monster. (Yes, in my eyes those who turned to blood magic made a monster out of Gared)
I don't like Rodrik mocking Gared like that, believe me. But I understand his reasons. Duncan was like family, he was Gared's actual family and he has decided to betray them which led to near extinction of House Forrester.
Rodrik is what the Whitehills made him into. Blame them, should you blame anybody.
I am not comparing the characters, since they are completely different. I am comparing their situations, which are pretty similar. Forresters have killed Ludd's father and brother, stolen their part of the grove, a man that served Thorren Forrester was the reason Karl Whitehill got greyscale and died - and after all that Ludd had to watch Forresters "get their happy ever after", same as Rodrik has to now. So, we can say Forresters have made Ludd into what he is & he had the right to take his vengeance, following this logic.
I do not for a moment support that choice. I didn't make it & under no circumstances would I ever do it. Cotter's one of the few characters from the game I actually love and I would never do something like that to him.
I'd hate to watch Gared turn into a monster as well - while I do not believe that those who made this choice inevitably end up with their Gared being a monster. Yes, this choice is shitty & I judge it a lot, but I can understand it, not from player's point of view, but in the context of the au, where it's presented like something that just happened, not something we chose - cuz the au can possibly follow only one set of choices, even if not all it's fans made them. Gared was under pressure, had torn loyalties & there was no good way out of that situation for him. I am pretty sure he felt a lot of guilt afterwards.
Here is the thing - I didn't mention that choice because I think it's good. I was just listing the shitty things Gared's been through - including the shit he did himself. Yes, he isn't flalwess and I'm not trying to say he is - but Rodrik's the last person who could possibly have the right to judge him, given why Gared did what he did.
I can see how the betrayal is one of the reasons why Rodrik is on edge & not being nice in general. I do not see how it justifies or is a good reason for him blaming, mocking or directing his anger towards particularly Gared.
Except that was Thorren's plan that his family would never accept. Gregor himself felt great remorse and never willingly attacked the Whitehills. Can Ludd say the same?
No, you got that wrong. RECLAIMED part of THEIR grove. "...and your grandfather, Lord Thorren the Bold, who seized back the river valley from the Whitehills." - Ortengryn to Ethan, Episode 1
Aye, and Gregor executed him himself. (The whole Greyscale conspiracy seems a little sloppy for me, pretty uneffective way to assassinate someone)
You mean how most of them were betrayed and slaughtered? There are no happy ever afters in Westeros, unfortunately. Not while men like Ludd or Torrhen hold the reins.
I'm not trying to justify Rodrik's anger towards Gared. I just think you judge him too harshly. Like Badger said, lack of sleep and the near extinction of your family would make anybody cranky.
Can I just say THIS DISCUSSION is the sort of thing I started the AU up for. I'm really happy to finally see people get into such passionate debates : D
It is a bit, I'll admit it. Some stuff comes out that way because I have to tie together multiple plot points to sort of fill the gaps telltale left us (this being a) why ortengryn was only around for 3 years, b) karl's death, c) something to do with Thorren). I don't claim to be a professional writer of any kind, but I suppose it's kind of in Thorren's personality to go for the most painful option of biological warfare which could potentially also be spread around highpoint extremely quickly if no one took notice, but that's just me - the guy who wrote it.
Also fuckin' White Walkers, haha.
Thorren's that big of a crook eh? Old cunt. So why does he hate the Whitehills to such extent? I assume the loss of someone dear? Surely a stern Stark loyalist wouldn't be so rotten? Or would he? Ha, what does it matter, he's dead and unimportant now. I really admire your work, it's been... inspiring to say the least. May your days be long and your mind sharper than any sword.
Something to do with his father being tricked into a "peace making" marriage with a Warrick Bastard posing as a Whitehill daughter. Said Warrick bastard was his mother and abused him as a child while his father was distant. There's sort of a cycle of abuse there, but it's no excuse.
Thorren was pretty much born a cunt. As our dear friend Ser Bronn of the Blackwater once said, there's no cure for that.
Gregor feeling remorse didn't exactly mend or change a thing. On the other hand - we have Gwyn, who felt remorse for the Forresters as well, but is still hated as "guilty by association" by many. Same way as Torrhen's descendants, in fact.
The game doesn't give us any exact information on the matter - "seized back" could be just poor phrasing, based on Ortengryn's false assumption that ironwood groves inherently belong to the Forresters by some reason. I follow au's canon, which says that Whitehill's part of the grove was stolen from them.
Again, this doesn't exactly change anything. Not to mention that if I was Ludd, I would not only blame the Forresters for not preventing their maester from doing something like that, but think that they are just covering their tracks & putting all the blame on one man, making up a story about him acting on his own will & not their orders to avoid responsibility, now that their plan failed.
I mean, how for years before the game's events Forresters didn't face any consequences of stealing Whitehill's groves & killing them.
Hey, it's always nice to know we can at least make Badger happy for all the swell stuff he does that we enjoy .D
Part 3.16
On that mysterious quote from our snowball friend, this is the end of Rodrik's POV for now.
That was definitely my favourite part so far! It's great to see Gared stand up to Rodrik like that. I still love Rodrik though. I just love the tension.
When Gared was all "You killed the only family I had left.You..." I was all "Yes, yes...?"
Gared vs Gryff!
You're clearly bent on demonizing the Forresters while making the Whitehills seem innocent. I said Gregor and the rest of his family condemned what Torrhen did and they never attacked the Whitehills. Gwyn justified her family's atrocities and blindly refused to admit she's in the wrong. How could she, when dominion over the Forresters would greatly benefit her family. She wanted us to accept enslavement for gods sake. Plus she's naive and powerless.
Eh no, "seized back" means that the Whitehills took it first, then the Forresters reclaimed it. That actually is canon whether you like it or not.
Also, false assumption? The Forresters and Whitehills both owned Ironwood in the past, only the Whitehills' incompetence and greed forced the Forresters to act and save the Ironwood. Yes it may have been taken from the Whitehills by force, but that's far better than leaving it in the hands of those that would destroy it. AU's canon is still deriving from the game's canon, it only expands it. And the canon is that the Whitehills fucking suck at Ironwooding.
Yes well, that assumption would be false.
Retaking. Their. Groves. And there have been many other conflicts between the FORS and the WHTS in the past, we don't know who started it all. From what I've seen of the Whitehills in game, I'd say the answer is clear.
Gregor and the rest of the family disliked what Torrhen did, but accepted the benefits his doings brought them, and none of them considered themselves to be in the wrong for benefitting from other's downfall. Gwyn disliked what her family did, but, in the same manner, accepted the benefits her family got from pushing Forresters (determinantly). What they did was same - except Gwyn actually helped the Forresters.
Enslavement's a blessing in comparison to house Forrester's state at the end of first season - and given that Gwyn didn't know about the possible help from the North Grove, what she was suggesting was simply a last chance that's been wasted.
Again, in this particular discussion I only take into account au's canon & the way it interprets the information given in the game.
I beg your pardon, WHAT? Seriously, the fuck? Ironwood's not a damsel in distress. It's not something to be saved. It's not a living being. It's property. Everyone's entitled to doing whatever they please with their property, including wasting it. Or, I don't know - lets justify a thief that steals an item because he knows more about how to take care of it than the original owner? If I have a guitar I can't play & someone who can steals it from me - is he in the right? I'm sorry, but that is ridiculous.
False or not, unless proven otherwise, it influences one's view of the Forresters, and not for the better.
Well... let's see. Rodrik just learned his father had bastards that he was never told about, Gared is pissed at Rodrik for killing Duncan, likely not trusting him for a while and now they're all going their separate ways, but Sylvi still has something to tell Rodrik.
Well, on the bright side, there's no Whitehill around to rub it in their faces.
Fuck yes, Gared. I knew you'd stand up for yourself. Splitting like this isn't a good choice though, given that even rolled together, Forrester's forces ain't impressive. Any plan seems dangerous at this point - but I wonder what Sylvi here has to say. If it's something Rod should know, it'll influence the situation, and, hopefully, give the guys a better plan. Anyway, I believe in her - Little Moon will save the day. She's literally the biggest badass of this plotline & it's about time she takes action. They'll probably still split up - but, hopefully, at least with an idea of what to do.
Ok, so tomorrow we'll get a new POV - and I just pray it's Talia, because I'm dying to see her interact with Ebbert. The wish to see it is even stronger than the wish to see Gryff again - & that's something. I'll just cross my fingers & toes.
We'll see Talia and Ebbert interact soon, just... don't get your hopes up about it being a direct continuation of where her POV left off. I had plans to make it, but the scene just didn't want to work. Also it's kind of interesting to leave it up to interpretation.
Well... y'know... I mean...
it was...
...that'swhytheforrestersaresogoodatit....imean...thatswhytheironwoodclanbrokeapartinthefirstplacebecausethedudeswhobecamethewhitehillsthoughtwhatmadeironwoodwassuperimmoralandstuff...
Shit, Badger, admittedly, I forgot about that? xD I'm sorry? Stil, I think it was clear what I meant, or so I hope.
Totally fine by me, as long as we see those two interact. In fact, I even believe it's better it doesn't continue Talia's last scene - it'd most likely be just awkward. A lil timeskip is for the best.
What bloody benefits?! All he accomplished was one Whitehill dying (that they didn't even want to die) and Ludd forever forbidding them from Highpoint. (lol ep 4 contradiction) And what downfall? The Whitehills were left alone and pleaded to. And considering what's happening now, their supposed "downfall" has brought them strength and prosperity. I don't give a shit about Gwyn's "dislike" of her family's actions, I want to see some action. She always bragged to Rodrik about how the bloodshed must stop, when it was HER father and HER family that were responsible for ALL the bloodshed. Aye, she told us of the traitor. But she didn't warn us about the harbor ambush that either costed us Asher, after that her father laid siege to Ironrath and slaughtered dozens of innocent men, women and children OR the ambush costed us Rodrik, to which Gwyn reacted by actually trying to save some lives - the man that stood between her and the love of her life is finally rotting in the ground and we can all forget about what's happened. After we enslave you or kill you. Thanks for the help Gwyn!
Oh maybe you like to live in shit and filth while being fucked in the ass by whitehill bastards, don't forget to thank them for sparing your life! I prefer death to enslavement and disregard for all the men and women that had to die trying to stop these up jumped whoresons.
Again, in this particular discussion I take in account maester Ortengryn's expertise and information. If he says they retaked their forests, they retaked their forests. And could we stop talking about this? If he took it by force and the Starks didn't intervene then there must've been a good reason for it. Plus this is unimportant and meaningless considering Ludd stole ALL of the frickin' Ironwood.
You're simply wrong. Do you remember what was said in the game? The Whitehills HAD Ironwood and they nearly destroyed all of it. The Forresters live of Ironwood. Should they just let the Whitehills do whatever they want, not caring that the Whitehills are destroying the only source of wealth that the Forresters have? That would be irrational and stupid. If you're so convinced that the Whitehills have the right to cut every tree they see down, don't be surprised when both of the houses delve into ruins and poverty. And the example you gave is just brilliant. Look, if I set a fire to my house that would spread to the next one, belonging to someone else and it's owner yells at me why I did it, I should just say: "Lol it's mine and I can do whatever the hell I want with it. " I would then end up in jail and my house would be taken from me. Or let's say I have a son. I beat that son and refuse to take care of him. He would be taken from me and I would again end up in prison. That's how things work. If you're a danger to yourself and someone else, measures must be taken to eliminate the danger and its source.
No, it's literally false and nothing more than an assumption. Why should the Forrester care about what Ludd thinks of them anyway? They didn't have any part in the killing of his son. Them or their children should not pay the price for being related to a man who did.
To be clear Ludd didn't exactly ban them from going to Highpoint, he said he'd never meet with them again for discussions of peace. He had to go back on himself in Ep4 because his house couldn't work as fast or as well as the Boltons wanted, so he had to swallow his pride and meet with Rodrik.
Part 3.17
I'm waiting for someone to "call bullshit" on that sparring when it makes perfect sense haha.
Seems like the Forrester signature move is a kick to the chest. You go Talia!
Take that pretty boy!
Nice moves, Talia.
Who's that arsehole at the end?
Same guy from back in part two who glared at Talia while he was cleaning his sword. You'll find out his actual name and stuff tomorrow.
Aw, Ostyn doesn't mean any harm. He's one of the few straightforward, legit people in this AU haha.
Yeah I know, it was just a joke. I didn't mean anything by it.
Ironwood business brings some income, doesn't it? Getting more trees = the income increasing.
Same as it would be nice to see some actions from the Forresters, other than expressing dislike of Thorren's doings. Their only actions ended up in a death of another Whitehill though.
Trust me, I would not forget to thank them for all the people who stayed alive rather than getting killed in a war that ended up as enslavement of the remaining ones either way.
I don't even know how to comment this. Yes, sure, we should never question the Starks, they clearly can't be wrong, because... Because reasons, I guess.
He simply put house Forrester in the same position they put his house in, by taking all the groves before.
Yeah, if you're no longer interested, we can.
Forresters only source of wealth is their part of the groves. Whitehills destroying parts of the groves that belong to the Whitehills influences Forresters in zero ways.
Fire can spread on other houses. How can Whitehill destroying their groves magically spread on the Forrester's groves?
Did you not read all of what I said? Your son is a living being with rights. Ironwood, as I've already mentioned, isn't.
Without proof, this statement doesn't hold any more meaning than the assumption about them being behind it.
Part 3.18
We finally know who angry stranger is. I'll link his wiki page when I finish updating the wiki.
The facepalm is strong with this one.
Here's the stranger's full page!
Also pretty weird how he insults Lyarra, who is in fact his second cousin. Everyone is related!!!!
First, thank you for only replying to small parts of my paragraphs that taken out of the context lose their initial meaning. An example, when I said: "And could we stop talking about this?" I didn't mean everything, just the part where I said that even if Forresters did stole a small part of the Ironwood (which they didn't) it doesn't really matter since Ludd stole ALL of it. He had no right and he disobeyed the Boltons. Still, no one minds. And at least Thorren (assuming he did) conquered it back the old way. Ludd just steals it without a fight.
Haha, nope. The Forresters executed their own maester for his doings. Even if said maester's actions "benefited" them as you say.
Right, because a prolonged life of slavery and abuse is better than dying like a free man, opposing the tyrants. We need men and women like that. If everyone thought like you do, who would stand up to tyrants like Whitehills?
YES, under Stark rule, peasants and children weren't slaughtered. Under Stark rule, acts of treason and theft were expected to be punished. And under Stark rule, you could question you lord without the fear of being mutilated or flayed.
I tire of repeating myself. I'm not sure what you even mean this time. Do you mean when the Ironwood was nearly destroyed under Whitehill rule, which then forced the Forresters to intervene? Even Duncan says they "squandered their share". Or do you mean the river valley's retake? Because in the first case, that happened who knows how long before Ludd was even born so it gives him absolutely no right to make demands. And the second case was already talked to death.
Oh you can't be serious. If the Whitehills destroyed their parts, they would destroy their source of income thus falling into ruin. They would then start to steal and cut down Ironwood that didn't belong to them. Oh wait, that's exactly what happened!
I just answered that.
Well this was a secondary example I posted, my first being the house fire. Excluding that trees ARE actually living beings (we learned that in biology class) still the Whitehills have no right to just destroy a precious resource just because they can. Especially if that resource is vital to their survival.
You want proof? Go check the AU wiki where it says that the only conspirators were Thorren and the maester.
Talia's lines in this made me laughed a little.
This Eddard guy reminds me of how Finn was when we all first met him. Will he be redeeming himself in the future, or are we just gonna hate him?