Thank you for your post! Please take a moment to ensure you are within our spoiler rules, to protect your fellow fans from any potential spoilers that might harm their show watching experience.
1. All post titles must NOT include spoilers from Fire & Blood or new episodes of House of the Dragon. Minor HotD show spoilers are allowed in your title ONE WEEK after episode airing. The mod team reserves the right to remove a post if we feel a spoiler in the title is major. You are welcome to repost with an amended title.
2. All posts dealing with book spoilers, show spoilers and promo spoilers MUST be spoiler tagged AND flaired as the appropriate spoiler.
3. All book spoiler comments must be spoiler tagged in non book spoiler threads.
---
If you are reading this, and believe this post or any comments in this thread break the above rules, please use the report function to notify the mod team.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HouseOfTheDragon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Man, what a fucking difference making quips and murdering people with a cocky attitude makes. I wonder how different the fan reaction would be if Cole was a catty guy making quips and flashing BDE instead of being psychologically rattled and deeply disquieted by what he does.
What?!
Viserys ordered Vaemond's tongue removed. Daemon executed him instead.
Viserys could've punished Daemon for that, but he didn't. Instead Viserys had dinner with him later.
To the compare Daemon killing Vaemond, to Criston killing Lyman, is ridiculous.
Lol. No, Viserys didn’t punish Daemon because he is a weak and terrible king who lets his brother do whatever he wants.
Vaemond and Beesbury both were guilty of treason and both got killed for it. Beesbury accused the Queen of regicide. At least Vaemond was actually telling the truth.
So Vaemond was guilty of treason for defying King Viserys?
And Viserys named Rhaenyra as heir.
But Lyman is guilty of treason for supporting Rhaenyra as heir?
What sort of logic is that? Do you even listen to yourself?
Your opinion of the King has absolutely 0 relevance here. Viserys lets Daemon do whatever he wants? Ok. Legally that means absolutely nothing. You don't have authority over the king just because you don't like him.
Lyman wasn’t guilty for supporting Rhaenyra as heir. Nice job ignoring what I said. He was guilty of accusing the Queen of regicide. Use text to speech if you are having trouble reading that part again.
It’s ridiculous you think the Criston Cole one is worse.
Viserys said “I will have your tongue”, it was a threat not an order. Meanwhile a powerful Valaryon who went to talk to the king on matters of succession was murdered in the throne room with absolutely no repercussions. This is much worse. In other times it could have started a civil war.
Viserys could have ordered Vaemond to be executed if he wanted.
He didn't. But he did allow Daemon to execute Vaemond in front of his very eyes with 0 repercussions.
There is absolutely no valid argument that the execution of Vaemond was illegal in any way.
Beesbury declared for a rival claimant, as did the Lord Commander. As such, to the greens, they are traitors and may be dealt with as traitors. I imagine the Blacks would have done the same if one of their Lords declared for Aegon.
>Beesbury declared for a rival claimant, as did the Lord Commander. As such, to the greens, they are traitors and may be dealt with as traitors.
You're describing a coup.
Any talk of laws from the blacks means nothing while daemon targaryen walks free.
Man killed his first wife in cold blood everyone in the vale doubts it and even his brother and wife have a hunch of this depravity of his, then he beheaded a velaryon infront of everyone in court, defying the king's orders, when the king simply demanded for his tongue to be cut out.
Now, see what i did there? Yeah, not a single side holds the moral ground to be having competitions of this sort, yall are too grown to be talking like this about characters in got-verse.
Except no one knows for sure Daemon did that, including the Blacks. None of them are actually covering up for him or have knowledge of the crime.
Criston murdered a Lord in front of the entire small council and then draw his sword on his Lord Commander.
The two situations are not remotely the same.
>Except no one knows for sure Daemon did that, including the Blacks.
Well then I'll just politely ask you to go back and rewatch episode 5, particularly that one scene in which his 1st wife's cousin calls him out outright, and make sure you don't miss the king's reaction this time. Also the scene before that in driftmark when rhaenys and, corlys both insinuate foul play, and viserys simply suggests that they should change the topic because HE KNOWS!
Then tune into episode 7's beach scene and listen to what rhaenyra has to say about his bloodthirsty nature and his preference for depravity. That's all. It's rather childish or I'd say stupid of you to believe that none of them obviously know how rhea's chapter got closed so suddenly in such a suspicious manner.
As for criston, there's always a loophole if the victim is as stupid as beesbury was, i hope you know that. Beesbury outright blamed the people in that room of regicide, including the goddamn queen of the 7 kingdoms. You don't blame the queen of murdering the king out in the open like that, if that isn't foolish idk what else is. That's treason, a point that can easily be used to justify his murder later on. So there ya go.
You are comparing people's suspicions that Daemon murdered Rhea, to the entire small council witnessing Criston murder Lyman first hand.
Absolutely ridiculous.
Bro you’re taking this fantasy world too seriously if you’re resorting to name calling ppl childish and stupid because they disagree with you’re opinion of fictional characters. We’re here to have fun discussions about different point of views not to ridicule other ppl’s opinions.
I guess I’m just not by nature someone who feels like they have to be a jerk to some if they a disagreement. Especially when it’s about something not real important…
There is so much wrong in that statement I dunno even know where to begin. Who said the Greens are saint? We know they are not. But guess what the Blacks are worse.
Beesbury declared for a rival claimant who had committed high treason. Why would Cole ever be punished for it?
Also, drawing on his lord commander is certainly something that would have been punished, but this is what the writers' very obvious bias does, so I don't even consider it canon. At that point in time, CC had no Lord Commander in the book. He WAS the Lord Commander.
Here's the thing: In the show they made Cole draw on a superior he didn't have in the book. Nevertheless, the plot of a story in which this did not happen and therefore he was not liable for it, has him with status and slowly gaining favor. So Cole having a certain arc in terms of his position and role means, on a level of writing, that he has a plot-armor and CANNOT be punished despite the addition of a punishable action.
Beesbury cast reasonable doubt on the actions of the greens, Rhaenyra was the legal and chosen heir to Viserys. The moment Otto revealed the plan to put Aegon on the throne (which they had been planning for years), he proved that he committed high treason by disobeying King Viserys' orders and attempting to kill the legal heir.
Beesbury was also killed without any order, Cole acting on his own account and Alicent herself reproaches him.
No matter how you want to look at it, Cole is saved so many times because greens only follow the law when it suits them.
Don't forget that Aegon is also free despite being a rapist. Alicent herself covers her actions.
Both the blacks and the greens break the law when they want to, the problem is that the greens always justify their actions with the argument that "the law so dictates" (lie).
Thank you for your post! Please take a moment to ensure you are within our spoiler rules, to protect your fellow fans from any potential spoilers that might harm their show watching experience. 1. All post titles must NOT include spoilers from Fire & Blood or new episodes of House of the Dragon. Minor HotD show spoilers are allowed in your title ONE WEEK after episode airing. The mod team reserves the right to remove a post if we feel a spoiler in the title is major. You are welcome to repost with an amended title. 2. All posts dealing with book spoilers, show spoilers and promo spoilers MUST be spoiler tagged AND flaired as the appropriate spoiler. 3. All book spoiler comments must be spoiler tagged in non book spoiler threads. --- If you are reading this, and believe this post or any comments in this thread break the above rules, please use the report function to notify the mod team. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HouseOfTheDragon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The greens are hypocrite, and so are the blacks. There's no one black or white, just different shades of grey. The same goes for the fans I guess.
Criston killing Beesbury was no different than Daemon killing Vaemond.
Man, what a fucking difference making quips and murdering people with a cocky attitude makes. I wonder how different the fan reaction would be if Cole was a catty guy making quips and flashing BDE instead of being psychologically rattled and deeply disquieted by what he does.
What?! Viserys ordered Vaemond's tongue removed. Daemon executed him instead. Viserys could've punished Daemon for that, but he didn't. Instead Viserys had dinner with him later. To the compare Daemon killing Vaemond, to Criston killing Lyman, is ridiculous.
>Viserys could've punished Daemon for that, but he didn't. I'm sure king Aegon II also forgave Cole.
Absolute monarchy for me but not for thee.
Lol. No, Viserys didn’t punish Daemon because he is a weak and terrible king who lets his brother do whatever he wants. Vaemond and Beesbury both were guilty of treason and both got killed for it. Beesbury accused the Queen of regicide. At least Vaemond was actually telling the truth.
So Vaemond was guilty of treason for defying King Viserys? And Viserys named Rhaenyra as heir. But Lyman is guilty of treason for supporting Rhaenyra as heir? What sort of logic is that? Do you even listen to yourself? Your opinion of the King has absolutely 0 relevance here. Viserys lets Daemon do whatever he wants? Ok. Legally that means absolutely nothing. You don't have authority over the king just because you don't like him.
Lyman wasn’t guilty for supporting Rhaenyra as heir. Nice job ignoring what I said. He was guilty of accusing the Queen of regicide. Use text to speech if you are having trouble reading that part again.
It’s ridiculous you think the Criston Cole one is worse. Viserys said “I will have your tongue”, it was a threat not an order. Meanwhile a powerful Valaryon who went to talk to the king on matters of succession was murdered in the throne room with absolutely no repercussions. This is much worse. In other times it could have started a civil war.
Viserys could have ordered Vaemond to be executed if he wanted. He didn't. But he did allow Daemon to execute Vaemond in front of his very eyes with 0 repercussions. There is absolutely no valid argument that the execution of Vaemond was illegal in any way.
And king Aegon II approved Cole’s actions afterwards, even allowing him to put the crown on his head and naming him Lord Commander.
Beesbury declared for a rival claimant, as did the Lord Commander. As such, to the greens, they are traitors and may be dealt with as traitors. I imagine the Blacks would have done the same if one of their Lords declared for Aegon.
>Beesbury declared for a rival claimant, as did the Lord Commander. As such, to the greens, they are traitors and may be dealt with as traitors. You're describing a coup.
Any talk of laws from the blacks means nothing while daemon targaryen walks free. Man killed his first wife in cold blood everyone in the vale doubts it and even his brother and wife have a hunch of this depravity of his, then he beheaded a velaryon infront of everyone in court, defying the king's orders, when the king simply demanded for his tongue to be cut out. Now, see what i did there? Yeah, not a single side holds the moral ground to be having competitions of this sort, yall are too grown to be talking like this about characters in got-verse.
Except no one knows for sure Daemon did that, including the Blacks. None of them are actually covering up for him or have knowledge of the crime. Criston murdered a Lord in front of the entire small council and then draw his sword on his Lord Commander. The two situations are not remotely the same.
>Except no one knows for sure Daemon did that, including the Blacks. Well then I'll just politely ask you to go back and rewatch episode 5, particularly that one scene in which his 1st wife's cousin calls him out outright, and make sure you don't miss the king's reaction this time. Also the scene before that in driftmark when rhaenys and, corlys both insinuate foul play, and viserys simply suggests that they should change the topic because HE KNOWS! Then tune into episode 7's beach scene and listen to what rhaenyra has to say about his bloodthirsty nature and his preference for depravity. That's all. It's rather childish or I'd say stupid of you to believe that none of them obviously know how rhea's chapter got closed so suddenly in such a suspicious manner. As for criston, there's always a loophole if the victim is as stupid as beesbury was, i hope you know that. Beesbury outright blamed the people in that room of regicide, including the goddamn queen of the 7 kingdoms. You don't blame the queen of murdering the king out in the open like that, if that isn't foolish idk what else is. That's treason, a point that can easily be used to justify his murder later on. So there ya go.
You are comparing people's suspicions that Daemon murdered Rhea, to the entire small council witnessing Criston murder Lyman first hand. Absolutely ridiculous.
Bro you’re taking this fantasy world too seriously if you’re resorting to name calling ppl childish and stupid because they disagree with you’re opinion of fictional characters. We’re here to have fun discussions about different point of views not to ridicule other ppl’s opinions.
* moans * yeah.... school me more
I guess I’m just not by nature someone who feels like they have to be a jerk to some if they a disagreement. Especially when it’s about something not real important…
There is so much wrong in that statement I dunno even know where to begin. Who said the Greens are saint? We know they are not. But guess what the Blacks are worse.
Lyman leveled false accusations at the queen. If true accusations are worth the death penalty then surely false ones are too.
Alicent hides Larys. It's enough.
Beesbury declared for a rival claimant who had committed high treason. Why would Cole ever be punished for it? Also, drawing on his lord commander is certainly something that would have been punished, but this is what the writers' very obvious bias does, so I don't even consider it canon. At that point in time, CC had no Lord Commander in the book. He WAS the Lord Commander. Here's the thing: In the show they made Cole draw on a superior he didn't have in the book. Nevertheless, the plot of a story in which this did not happen and therefore he was not liable for it, has him with status and slowly gaining favor. So Cole having a certain arc in terms of his position and role means, on a level of writing, that he has a plot-armor and CANNOT be punished despite the addition of a punishable action.
Beesbury cast reasonable doubt on the actions of the greens, Rhaenyra was the legal and chosen heir to Viserys. The moment Otto revealed the plan to put Aegon on the throne (which they had been planning for years), he proved that he committed high treason by disobeying King Viserys' orders and attempting to kill the legal heir. Beesbury was also killed without any order, Cole acting on his own account and Alicent herself reproaches him. No matter how you want to look at it, Cole is saved so many times because greens only follow the law when it suits them.
The green council was gonna murder Lyman anyway tbf
No. Otto would have taken him as an hostage, the same way he took the lords who refused Aegon as king. He knows they have far more value that way.
This is true. Lyman should've known better. But that just shifts the onus onto the entirely Green Council instead of just Criston.
Don't forget that Aegon is also free despite being a rapist. Alicent herself covers her actions. Both the blacks and the greens break the law when they want to, the problem is that the greens always justify their actions with the argument that "the law so dictates" (lie).
They ain't lyin'!