[TV] House of the Dragon

[Twdft]

This was literally a situation of inexperienced riders who lost control in the heat of the moment. It has nothing to do with their "blood purity." Ugh.

Yeah, I don't get why people are so hung up on the boys not being able to control their dragons 100%.

Just imagine you're in the dog park with your giant rottweiler and sic him "as a prank" on your nephews smaller pitpull. Once the hot pursuit is on, do they actually think they could calm the dogs down again before one bites the other?

[Varodoc]

What? The rivalry (more like intense dislike) between Otto and Daemon didn't change shit.

If Otto and Daemon weren't rivals, Daemon would have remained heir instead of Rhaenyra, until Aegon the Elder's birth, and all problems would have been avoided.

Viserys defended his brother from Otto's accusations and only exiled and replaced him after Daemon insulted Emma and Baelon's memory.

Viserys always allowed Otto to distance Daemon from the court, such as naming him commander of the City Watch (which obviously isn't an influential or important position at court, just ask Janos Slynt). If anything, Viserys defended Otto, stating that he was honorable, when Daemon accused him of being dangerous and treacherous. Also, after Daemon culled the criminals in the city, Viserys made it very clear that other such acts would not be tolerated.

Viserys was very close to Otto and usually defended him from Daemon's accusations. The problem lies with Daemon; he thought that Otto just wanted to divide their family, while in reality he was blind to his own flaws: the fact that he is a shit husband, that he'd make a terrible king, that he's violent, bloody, ruthless, and should not give any advice to the king. Sadly Daemon lacked self-awareness. If he had just a bit of self-awareness, he'd realize that it's not Otto who is at fault for protecting the government of the realm from a thuggish, violent dude.

but he certainly isn't part and parcel of his motivations and goals which he explicitly outlines among others in Ep. 3.

Daemon is the very reason why Otto suggested Rhaenyra be named heir in the first place. That's from where all the following problems stem from.

It's safe to say that things probably would have gone much differently if Otto didn't feel like Daemon wasn't suited to succeed Viserys.

Call the guy senile if you want, he certainly lays it on thick by saying Viserys is well, but the point is that the situation still doesn't look legit no matter how one twists the pretzels.

There's a difference between:

1) a situation looking suspicious because you have valid evidence that something is wrong and got to that conclusion through deductive reasoning;

2) a situation looking suspicious because you are senile and can't remember how the king looked (Beesbury) or are just straight up mad/raged (Daemon).

Viserys literally had to be taken away from dinner urgently because he was crying out in agony. Daemon saw it, Beesbury apparently saw it, everyone saw it. It would look suspicious ONLY IF Viserys had been healthy the night before but that clearly wasn't the case, and furthermore all these people should know that Otto wouldn't make any assassination plot that obvious. This is the guy who orchestrated a coup d'état flawlessly without anyone even having a clue (see how oblivious Rhaenyra was to anything that was happening outside of her little island in the middle of fuck nowhere).

This reminds me of a quote from Tyrion along the lines of "you'd think that if i wanted the king dead, i wouldn't make it so obvious by literally standing there" (referring to the Purple Wedding). This quote can be used in this context too. Like Tyrion, Otto is very smart and cunning, if he wanted the king dead, he absolutely wouldn't make it that obvious.

If I had been on Dragonstone, I would have easily realized that Otto/Alicent couldn't have killed the king; because I wouldn't let anger cloud my judgement, and I would realize that the schemer Otto Hightower likely wouldn't make it that obvious.

but the whole thing still smells like BS nevertheless.

How does it smell like BS when the king was in such bad shape that he was taking 3 hours just to cross a room?

and it wasn't out of sadism or paranoia like Joffrey, Ramsay, Aerys II or Maegor I did.

Whatever his motivation might have been, he still gave his wife a violently brutal and painful death (paralysed her then bashed her face in repeatedly with a boulder) and did it so he could illegally groom his niece. The death he gave to Lady Royce is definitely on the levels of something that Joffrey or Ramsay would think of.

And of course he's not the ruler so his misdeeds have less dramatic consequences.

Thanks to Otto btw. The people who think that Otto is the worst scumbag in the world (even though his motivations are the exact same as Corlys pre-ep. 10 and Corlys doesn't get nearly as much hate) should at least acknowledge that Otto saved the realm from the second coming of Maegor.

I mean, look how much shit Daemon was pulling in the first 5 episodes and he was just the commander of the City Watch and had been disinherited, now imagine how much he would make the kingdoms bleed if he sat on the Iron Throne.

[Jastall]

If Otto and Daemon weren't rivals, Daemon would have remained heir instead of Rhaenyra, until Aegon the Elder's birth, and all problems would have been avoided.



Viserys always allowed Otto to distance Daemon from the court, such as naming him commander of the City Watch (which obviously isn't an influential or important position at court, just ask Janos Slynt). If anything, Viserys defended Otto, stating that he was honorable, when Daemon accused him of being dangerous and treacherous. Also, after Daemon culled the criminals in the city, Viserys made it very clear that other such acts would not be tolerated.

Viserys was very close to Otto and usually defended him from Daemon's accusations. The problem lies with Daemon; he thought that Otto just wanted to divide their family, while in reality he was blind to his own flaws: the fact that he is a shit husband, that he'd make a terrible king, that he's violent, bloody, ruthless, and should not give any advice to the king. Sadly Daemon lacked self-awareness. If he had just a bit of self-awareness, he'd realize that it's not Otto who is at fault for protecting the government of the realm from a thuggish, violent dude.



Daemon is the very reason why Otto suggested Rhaenyra be named heir in the first place. That's from where all the following problems stem from.

It's safe to say that things probably would have gone much differently if Otto didn't feel like Daemon wasn't suited to succeed Viserys.



There's a difference between:

1) a situation looking suspicious because you have valid evidence that something is wrong and got to that conclusion through deductive reasoning;

2) a situation looking suspicious because you are senile and can't remember how the king looked (Beesbury) or are just straight up mad/raged (Daemon).

Viserys literally had to be taken away from dinner urgently because he was crying out in agony. Daemon saw it, Beesbury apparently saw it, everyone saw it. It would look suspicious ONLY IF Viserys had been healthy the night before but that clearly wasn't the case, and furthermore all these people should know that Otto wouldn't make any assassination plot that obvious. This is the guy who orchestrated a coup d'état flawlessly without anyone even having a clue (see how oblivious Rhaenyra was to anything that was happening outside of her little island in the middle of fuck nowhere).

This reminds me of a quote from Tyrion along the lines of "you'd think that if i wanted the king dead, i wouldn't make it so obvious by literally standing there" (referring to the Purple Wedding). This quote can be used in this context too. Like Tyrion, Otto is very smart and cunning, if he wanted the king dead, he absolutely wouldn't make it that obvious.

If I had been on Dragonstone, I would have easily realized that Otto/Alicent couldn't have killed the king; because I wouldn't let anger cloud my judgement, and I would realize that the schemer Otto Hightower likely wouldn't make it that obvious.


How does it smell like BS when the king was in such bad shape that he was taking 3 hours just to cross a room?



Whatever his motivation might have been, he still gave his wife a violently brutal and painful death (paralysed her then bashed her face in repeatedly with a boulder) and did it so he could illegally groom his niece. The death he gave to Lady Royce is definitely on the levels of something that Joffrey or Ramsay would think of.



Thanks to Otto btw. The people who think that Otto is the worst scumbag in the world (even though his motivations are the exact same as Corlys pre-ep. 10 and Corlys doesn't get nearly as much hate) should at least acknowledge that Otto saved the realm from the second coming of Maegor.

I mean, look how much shit Daemon was pulling in the first 5 episodes and he was just the commander of the City Watch and had been disinherited, now imagine how much he would make the kingdoms bleed if he sat on the Iron Throne.

It really isn't safe to say that. The actual show doesn't present Otto as the driving force behind Viserys choosing Rhaenyra and reaffirming his support for her many, many times over the years; Viserys himself is. Daemon is, yes, one reason but hardly the only reason; later on, Viserys's crushing guilt RE Emma is explicitly a strong motivation as well. And as the show goes on Otto is obviously less and less interesting in having Rhaenyra on the throne, and indeed was first in line to pimp his daughter to the king so it was his blood that could potentially usurp her decades before the Dance.

You're giving Otto far too much agency in this business while ignoring Viserys's. The two major falling outs between Daemon and Viserys were a result of the former's actions, not any scheming or maneuvering from Otto's part; at most he truthfully told his king what Daemon said/did. The only person that likes Daemon on the Small Council is Corys, and even then mostly due to shared interests at times. Daemon didn't need Otto to look like someone who should be kept far away from court, he did that by himself well enough.

As for Daemon being Maegor the Cruel born again, possible but I don't think so. He wouldn't have been a good king, but I think he'd either have been a proto Daeron the Conqueror (I totally see Daemon going to war with Dorne to prove himself) or a Robert Baratheon type worn down by the tedium of ruling until he doesn't care anymore. Now again neither of those were good kings and neither would he be, but I'm not sure he would have been a Maegor-tier sadistic disaster.

To say nothing of the fact that failings, moral or practical, aren't what matters to Otto, else he wouldn't be putting his obviously inept rapist of a grandson on the throne. He had no control over Daemon, that was the beef.

[Varodoc]

It really isn't safe to say that. The actual show doesn't present Otto as the driving force behind Viserys choosing Rhaenyra and reaffirming his support for her many, many times over the years; Viserys himself is.

Otto is the one who plants the idea into Viserys' mind in the first place by mentioning Rhaenyra at the Small Council meeting after Aemma's death.

And as the show goes on Otto is obviously less and less interesting in having Rhaenyra on the throne,

Otto wants the stability of the realm first and foremost. Having a queen doesn't guarantee the stability of the realm, because Westeros is a patriarchal society. Having a king guarantees it, so ofc Otto threw Rhaenyra under the bus after Daemon was dealt with.

and indeed was first in line to pimp his daughter to the king so it was his blood that could potentially usurp her decades before the Dance.

Was he the first in line to do that? It's a tough competition between him and Corlys Velaryon, who also pimped his 12 years old kid to the king btw.

As for Daemon being Maegor the Cruel born again, possible but I don't think so. He wouldn't have been a good king, but I think he'd either have been a proto Daeron the Conqueror (I totally see Daemon going to war with Dorne to prove himself) or a Robert Baratheon type worn down by the tedium of ruling until he doesn't care anymore. Now again neither of those were good kings and neither would he be, but I'm not sure he would have been a Maegor-tier sadistic disaster.

In the last episode, he showed that he does not have the temper to rule. He is too violent and warmongering, he just wants to get into fights. He doesn't care about diplomacy, he never listens to reason. He didn't even want to hear Aegon the Elder's terms of peace and just wanted to slaughter his delegation. He would be a tyrant. He's like Garrosh. Remember how Garrosh tried to attack Varian at a neutral diplomatic meeting in WoTLK? Daemon is the same. He just wants blood and doesn't care about anything else. As evidenced by the fact that he wanted to attack Aegon the Elder's delegation instead of at least listening to his peace terms.

People online give Aemond crap for attacking a diplomatic envoy (he didn't even want to kill Lucerys btw), but no one brings up how Daemon wanted to do the exact same thing to Otto and the rest of the diplomats Aegon sent to Dragonstone.

To say nothing of the fact that failings, moral or practical, aren't what matters to Otto, else he wouldn't be putting his obviously inept rapist of a grandson on the throne. He had no control over Daemon, that was the beef.

This point is moot. The Targaryens in general have committed all kinds of atrocities and crimes against the smallfolk. Daemon killed an innocent guard. Rhaenys killed hundreds of innocent civilians during an act of terrorism in the heart of the capital, Rhaenyra will turn into a war criminal.

Otto is an immoral and pragmatic man who is willing to put a rapist on the throne, correct.

How are his enemies any different? Rhaenyra was literally smiling and having fun with a terrorist who crushed hundreds of innocents at the Dragonpit.

If your reason to despise Otto is that he doesn't care that his grandson raped a servant girl, well... I mean... the Targaryens literally have a God complex and believe themselves closer to Gods than men. Singling out Otto [and Aegon] doesn't make much sense here.

[Syegfryed]

Nothing I said in any way contradicts that. *shrug*

- - - Updated - - -



Like...this makes no sense. Rhaenys having silver hair is a show-ism. She had black, Baratheon hair. There were plenty of dark-haired Targaryens, and their physical features absolutely played no part in their ability to bond with a dragon or control it.

This was literally a situation of inexperienced riders who lost control in the heat of the moment. It has nothing to do with their "blood purity." Ugh.

Its just like i know that already, and merely raised a point of blood purity out of curiosity, and if would have anything to do with the ability to control dragons or to do more.

[Jastall]

Otto is the one who plants the idea into Viserys' mind in the first place by mentioning Rhaenyra at the Small Council meeting after Aemma's death.



Otto wants the stability of the realm first and foremost. Having a queen doesn't guarantee the stability of the realm, because Westeros is a patriarchal society. Having a king guarantees it, so ofc Otto threw Rhaenyra under the bus after Daemon was dealt with.



Was he the first in line to do that? It's a tough competition between him and Corlys Velaryon, who also pimped his 12 years old kid to the king btw.



In the last episode, he showed that he does not have the temper to rule. He is too violent and warmongering, he just wants to get into fights. He doesn't care about diplomacy, he never listens to reason. He didn't even want to hear Aegon the Elder's terms of peace and just wanted to slaughter his delegation. He would be a tyrant. He's like Garrosh. Remember how Garrosh tried to attack Varian at a neutral diplomatic meeting in WoTLK? Daemon is the same. He just wants blood and doesn't care about anything else. As evidenced by the fact that he wanted to attack Aegon the Elder's delegation instead of at least listening to his peace terms.

People online give Aemond crap for attacking a diplomatic envoy (he didn't even want to kill Lucerys btw), but no one brings up how Daemon wanted to do the exact same thing to Otto and the rest of the diplomats Aegon sent to Dragonstone.


This point is moot. The Targaryens in general have committed all kinds of atrocities and crimes against the smallfolk. Daemon killed an innocent guard. Rhaenys killed hundreds of innocent civilians during an act of terrorism in the heart of the capital, Rhaenyra will turn into a war criminal.

Otto is an immoral and pragmatic man who is willing to put a rapist on the throne, correct.

How are his enemies any different? Rhaenyra was literally smiling and having fun with a terrorist who crushed hundreds of innocents at the Dragonpit.

If your reason to despise Otto is that he doesn't care that his grandson raped a servant girl, well... I mean... the Targaryens literally have a God complex and believe themselves closer to Gods than men. Singling out Otto [and Aegon] doesn't make much sense here.

Otto mentioning her is flimsy evidence that nothing would have happened without it. It remaining Viserys's decision to both make and -more importantly- keep. Which is why he's also partially responsible for the ensuing shenanigans of course.

Otto wanting stability first tho, that is certainly not my reading of events. Otto wants power. He wouldn't have planned a coup for more than a decade if not. Corys is also ambitious, but much less of a schemer and far, far less responsible for the state of affairs at the end of S1. No one in this story has grand ideals, they're all self-interested, and you're definitely too biased if you think Otto is any different. Of course he thinks it would be swell to have a guy on the throne when said guy just happens to be his grandson. You said Otto didn't want Daemon on the throne because of his failings, I just countered that Otto doesn't give one iota of a fuck about that so long as he controls the person on the throne. The major difference between Aegon and Daemon in his eyes isn't that one is a better person than the other, it's that Aegon is pliable to Otto and Daemon isn't.

I don't dislike Otto because he's an asshole. Most of the show's characters are and you could argue there's a bunch who are bigger ones- Aegon, Larys, Criston, Daemon and Rhaenyra chief among them. I dislike him because he's a shifty and disloyal asshole who made things worse more than anyone else, even against stiff competition from the aforementioned other bad people. His, and other Green leadership's, maneuvering to sit Aegon on the throne is the prime cause for all this, even if Viserys's political ineptitude, Daemon's rashness and Rhaenyra's selfishness and carelessness RE her status as heir also contributed heavily to the situation. That the causes of the Dance are complex does not mean I cannot blame one party above the others.

Of the main characters, Viserys set aside since he dead, Alicent is probably the least morally compromised one. She still went along with the wishes of her entourage, but in large part she doesn't have that much of a choice anyway when her choices are to go along with the schemes or betray her family and likely lose everything, children included. She was made a pawn and it's another reason I don't like the Green leadership, even if such things are the norm in Westeros.

[Varodoc]

Otto mentioning her is flimsy evidence that nothing would have happened without it. It remaining Viserys's decision to both make and -more importantly- keep. Which is why he's also partially responsible for the ensuing shenanigans of course.

Of course Viserys is partially responsible, I'd go as far as to say that he was the main culprit. The Maesters in-universe even acknowledged that, though Viserys was kind-hearted and good, in the end he was also weak and foolish and planted the seeds for the civil war.

Otto wanting stability first tho, that is certainly not my reading of events. Otto wants power. He wouldn't have planned a coup for more than a decade if not

Everyone wants power in Westeros, Otto himself noted that everyone seeks absolute power. What makes Otto unique, despite his manipulative and slimy nature, is that he genuinely wants what is best for the realm. He acts in what he believes is best for the stability of the realm.

He's not like Tywin, who put family before the realm (starting the War of the Five King as revenge for Catelyn kidnapping Tyrion). He's not like Littlefinger, who basically just wanted ultimate power even if it meant burning the kingdom to ash. He's more like Varys; a manipulative schemer who seeks power, but also puts the realm above everything else.

We see this in every single act Otto made. He alienated Daemon from the court and finally had him replaced as heir because he believed Daemon would be a terrible king for the realm. He insisted that Viserys remarry with his daughter because he wanted to give Viserys the opportunity to produce a male heir and finally secure the succession. He conspired to put Aegon on the throne because he believed that the realm would never accept a woman (Westeros has centuries of traditions and laws privileging men); putting the firstborn son of the king on the throne, in his mind, was a way to finally stabilize the realm and secure the succession.

Otto recognizes that his acts are immoral and cruel (for instance, he admits that having Rhaenyra and her family slaughtered would be cruel acts), regardless he justifies himself many times by pointing out that they are sacrifices made to ensure the stability of the realm. Even when he is alone with Alicent, so when he has nothing to hide, he still reaffirms that he is doing everything for the stability of the realm.

This is a nuance of the character that some in the fandom sadly missed. Otto is not just some power-hungry schemer who wants his bloodline on the throne. He doesn't want power and the throne for selfish reasons, he wants them because he genuinely believes that he is maintaining the stability of the realm. This is a nuance that makes the character more complex.

You can't deny that the GoT fandom is extremely reductive. People have been comparing Otto to Tywin and Littlefinger since the first episode, simply because they are all schemers. But Otto is very different from them. He doesn't want to start wars to protect his family's legacy (he tried to make peace with Rhaenyra, the war will start because of an accident of the dragonriders -- meanwhile, Tywin never tried diplomacy with the Starks), and he most certainly doesn't want the country to burn.

And sure, in hindsight we can say that Otto's actions caused the civil war and destabilized the realm; but Otto did not want this The civil war starts because of a tragic accident in which Lucerys and Aemond could not control their dragons. So, it is correct to say that Otto is one of the culprits behind the civil war, with his schemes; but it should also be acknowledged that he did NOT want war. He's not Baelish, who wanted to start a war. Otto wanted to avoid war at all cost, because he knew that a war between dragons would be a disaster for the realm.

and you're definitely too biased if you think Otto is any different.

No, I'm impartial. In these recent posts, I acknowledged that Otto usurped the throne, staged a coup d'état, and was immoral (putting his rapist grandson on the throne). I don't deny that he did these three terrible things. But since I am impartial, I also acknowledge that he has done good things (like serving as Hand dutifully for decades) and that his motivations might not be as selfish as some people online think.

Of the main characters, Viserys set aside since he dead, Alicent is probably the least morally compromised one. She still went along with the wishes of her entourage, but in large part she doesn't have that much of a choice anyway when her choices are to go along with the schemes or betray her family and likely lose everything, children included. She was made a pawn and it's another reason I don't like the Green leadership, even if such things are the norm in Westeros.

At the very least, Alicent is the reason why Rhaenyra and co. are still alive in the first place. She blackmailed her father and forced him to abandon the assassination plot on Rhaenyra and her family. If Otto had his way, Rhaenyra and co. would have been slaughtered quickly and methodically by the Kingsguard.

On Dragonstone, the only one who was really worth a damn in fighting skills was Daemon. But since the Kingsguard, as per Otto's commands, were going to ambush them swiftly before word of Viserys' death even reached them, not even Daemon would have reacted in time.

By stopping her father assassination's plot, Alicent pretty much saved Rhaenyra and her family. The Greens are still the usurpers, like the Lannisters in GoT, this is factual and no one denied it; but, unlike the Lannisters, the Greens are definitely more tragic and morally grey.

Even Aegon is given a humanizing moment (when he cries to Alicent in ep.8), as pointed out by the lead writer. He is a rapist scumbag, but he was also a product of terrible parenting, where Alicent treated him as nothing more than a pawn in her political games and Viserys was just a deadbeat dad.

[Jastall]

Of course Viserys is partially responsible, I'd go as far as to say that he was the main culprit. The Maesters in-universe even acknowledged that, though Viserys was kind-hearted and good, in the end he was also weak and foolish and planted the seeds for the civil war.



Everyone wants power in Westeros, Otto himself noted that everyone seeks absolute power. What makes Otto unique, despite his manipulative and slimy nature, is that he genuinely wants what is best for the realm. He acts in what he believes is best for the stability of the realm.

He's not like Tywin, who put family before the realm (starting the War of the Five King as revenge for Catelyn kidnapping Tyrion). He's not like Littlefinger, who basically just wanted ultimate power even if it meant burning the kingdom to ash. He's more like Varys; a manipulative schemer who seeks power, but also puts the realm above everything else.

We see this in every single act Otto made. He alienated Daemon from the court and finally had him replaced as heir because he believed Daemon would be a terrible king for the realm. He insisted that Viserys remarry with his daughter because he wanted to give Viserys the opportunity to produce a male heir and finally secure the succession. He conspired to put Aegon on the throne because he believed that the realm would never accept a woman (Westeros has centuries of traditions and laws privileging men); putting the firstborn son of the king on the throne, in his mind, was a way to finally stabilize the realm and secure the succession.

Otto recognizes that his acts are immoral and cruel (for instance, he admits that having Rhaenyra and her family slaughtered would be cruel acts), regardless he justifies himself many times by pointing out that they are sacrifices made to ensure the stability of the realm. Even when he is alone with Alicent, so when he has nothing to hide, he still reaffirms that he is doing everything for the stability of the realm.

This is a nuance of the character that some in the fandom sadly missed. Otto is not just some power-hungry schemer who wants his bloodline on the throne. He doesn't want power and the throne for selfish reasons, he wants them because he genuinely believes that he is maintaining the stability of the realm. This is a nuance that makes the character more complex.

You can't deny that the GoT fandom is extremely reductive. People have been comparing Otto to Tywin and Littlefinger since the first episode, simply because they are all schemers. But Otto is very different from them. He doesn't want to start wars to protect his family's legacy (he tried to make peace with Rhaenyra, the war will start because of an accident of the dragonriders -- meanwhile, Tywin never tried diplomacy with the Starks), and he most certainly doesn't want the country to burn.

And sure, in hindsight we can say that Otto's actions caused the civil war and destabilized the realm; but Otto did not want this The civil war starts because of a tragic accident in which Lucerys and Aemond could not control their dragons. So, it is correct to say that Otto is one of the culprits behind the civil war, with his schemes; but it should also be acknowledged that he did NOT want war. He's not Baelish, who wanted to start a war. Otto wanted to avoid war at all cost, because he knew that a war between dragons would be a disaster for the realm.



No, I'm impartial. In these recent posts, I acknowledged that Otto usurped the throne, staged a coup d'état, and was immoral (putting his rapist grandson on the throne). I don't deny that he did these three terrible things. But since I am impartial, I also acknowledge that he has done good things (like serving as Hand dutifully for decades) and that his motivations might not be as selfish as some people online think.


At the very least, Alicent is the reason why Rhaenyra and co. are still alive in the first place. She blackmailed her father and forced him to abandon the assassination plot on Rhaenyra and her family. If Otto had his way, Rhaenyra and co. would have been slaughtered quickly and methodically by the Kingsguard.

On Dragonstone, the only one who was really worth a damn in fighting skills was Daemon. But since the Kingsguard, as per Otto's commands, were going to ambush them swiftly before word of Viserys' death even reached them, not even Daemon would have reacted in time.

By stopping her father assassination's plot, Alicent pretty much saved Rhaenyra and her family. The Greens are still the usurpers, like the Lannisters in GoT, this is factual and no one denied it; but, unlike the Lannisters, the Greens are definitely more tragic and morally grey.

Even Aegon is given a humanizing moment (when he cries to Alicent in ep.8), as pointed out by the lead writer. He is a rapist scumbag, but he was also a product of terrible parenting, where Alicent treated him as nothing more than a pawn in her political games and Viserys was just a deadbeat dad.

I wouldn't say Viserys is the main culprit. Had his wishes been obeyed, things would have turned out much better. He handled the situation poorly and really should have named Aegon heir when he was born when all's said and done, but on the other hand we have the benefit of hindsight. At that point he had already declared Rhaenyra as heir with much pomp and circumstance. Plus he already had a son die soon after childbirth. Walking back on his decision wasn't something he could do lightly, and his trauma RE Emma prevented him from seeing the bigger picture. It's not politically sound but so very understandable.

If Otto wanted stability, he wouldn't have plotted to get his blood on the throne and crowned Aegon out of the blue the moment Viserys died, like come on, there's no way such an act doesn't lead to at least some level of conflict. If such was his chief concern, he could have rallied behind Rhaenyra in the first place because Aegon, whom he controls, is the only credible threat to her claim. If Aegon and the Greens bend the knee, there's really no one left to challenge her; of course their interest isn't really in doing so since both her and especially Daemon haven't exactly proven trustworthy but still, we're talking about putting the realm first. Or he'd have at least done things semi legally, not override the late king's wishes and at least tried to call for another Great Council to make his case to the nobles of the realm. He wanted to avoid a war but he did more than anyone else to stoke the fires of conflict. Only Viserys and Rheanyra could be argued to be just about as culpable as him. Crowning Aegon is a very, very stupid move that was incredibly likely to backfire given the immense tensions already present between the parties. One does not get to throw oil into the fire and then be surprised by the resulting blaze. Actions speak louder than words at some point.

Otto is kinda sorta like Varys... but book Varys, who is very much not a good person, not the dumbed down show Varys that got turned into a virtuous idiot much like show Tyrion. Otto is also a lot more interested in his family's power than Varys who of course doesn't have one. Basically he's a less menacing Tywin and Varys mash-up. No, he's not like Littlefinger, and thank goodness for that because Larys is already one LF copy too many.

As for your last point, meh, guess we can say the same for Rhaenys who could have killed the Greens with but a word but didn't because reasons. I do agree the Greens aren't as bad as the Lannisters, or more accurately Tywin and Cercei, were in ASoIaF. It's one of the things I like about the series, the moral waters are a lot more muddled than in the books or previous show, and hell even compared to the history of the Dance in the books where the Blacks are also worse (Rheanyra's a bitch in House of the Dragon, yet her book character is something else), but the Greens are basically presented as irredeemably awful all around, especially Aemond and Criston.

[Adamas102]

Its just like i know that already, and merely raised a point of blood purity out of curiosity, and if would have anything to do with the ability to control dragons or to do more.

I don’t think GRRM or the showrunners would use something as dumb as “blood purity” to determine dragon rider skill.

Both Aemond and Lucerys inherited 50% of their genes from their non-Targaryen parents. Just because one has light colored hair doesn’t make him more “pure”. That’s a pretty ignorant and outdated view of looking at heredity.

Vhagar’s rider prior to Aemond was Laena who only had about 20% Targaryen genetic material. Dragons don’t care about some arbitrary genetic percentage. If the rider has Targaryen genes then they’re good to go once bonded and that’s it.

[Syegfryed]

I don’t think GRRM or the showrunners would use something as dumb as “blood purity” to determine dragon rider skill.

Both Aemond and Lucerys inherited 50% of their genes from their non-Targaryen parents. Just because one has light colored hair doesn’t make him more “pure”. That’s a pretty ignorant and outdated view of looking at heredity.

Vhagar’s rider prior to Aemond was Laena who only had about 20% Targaryen genetic material. Dragons don’t care about some arbitrary genetic percentage. If the rider has Targaryen genes then they’re good to go once bonded and that’s it.

You don't rly get 50%/50% perfect ratio of said linege anyway, and no, its not a "outaded or ignorant", at least not in this case, either way, the subject was already dropped long time ago, i know you have to put your nose because sense of superiority but like i said, i know that already, you didn't had to say anything

[Varodoc]

I wouldn't say Viserys is the main culprit. Had his wishes been obeyed, things would have turned out much better. He handled the situation poorly and really should have named Aegon heir when he was born when all's said and done, but on the other hand we have the benefit of hindsight. At that point he had already declared Rhaenyra as heir with much pomp and circumstance. Plus he already had a son die soon after childbirth. Walking back on his decision wasn't something he could do lightly, and his trauma RE Emma prevented him from seeing the bigger picture. It's not politically sound but so very understandable.

Even if he wanted to keep Rhaenyra as heir, he still messed up when he recalled Otto for a second term. Against the advice of Daemon and Rhaenyra. Otto might have orchestrated the whole coup, but if the king was actually effective and strong, he wouldn't have been able to pull that shit.

Otto was able to usurp the throne for his bloodline only because Viserys was weak, it's from his weakness that everything started.

Is Otto the main culprit, for plotting the usurpation? Or is Viserys the main culprit, for giving so much power to Otto and failing to keep him under control?

If Otto wanted stability, he wouldn't have plotted to get his blood on the throne and crowned Aegon out of the blue the moment Viserys died, like come on, there's no way such an act doesn't lead to at least some level of conflict

He still wanted stability when he did that. Ofc he also wanted power and to see his bloodline on the throne, but that's the ambition of literally everyone in Westeros. The Targaryen dynasty was literally built by a dude who decided one day that he would be king of everything and everyone on the continent.

This doesn't change the fact that Otto's main goal was always the stability of the realm. Since the laws and traditions of Westeros always favoured men on matters of inheritance, Otto reasoned that many nobles would not accept a woman as the queen over the male's firstborn son (Aegon the Elder).

Rhaenys herself states early on in the show how the men of the realm would rather go to war than see a woman rule. Because the pre-established "order of things" always privileged men.

This is a crucial world-building point. The traditions and laws of Westeros have become too ingrained in the society, to the point that many would prefer to go to war than accept a queen as ruler. So you see? Otto's main goal was still stability, when he plotted to have his son usurp the throne. His belief that Rhaenyra's reign would be unstable is 100% reasonable and justified by simply looking at centuries of laws and traditions privileging men.

That's why, in the last episode, he laments how Rhaenyra and Viserys could never see the "truth". That, by virtue of "all laws of Gods and men", the King's firstborn male son is the rightful heir. The point here is not whether Otto was right or wrong to defy his king's wishes; the point here is that Otto is always thinking about what is best in terms of the stability of the realm. And in a very patriarchal and backward society like Westeros, a male ruler would likely ensure more stability than a female ruler.

If Aegon and the Greens bend the knee, there's really no one left to challenge her;

It's not so simple, unfortunately. So long as Aegon and Aemond lived, rebellions could always be raised to push their claims, regardless of their own personal motivations. And the fact that the King's firstborn son lived could always be used as a way to discredit Rhaenyra's claim.

We see this fact very well with Daenerys and Jon in S8. It's one of the few things that made sense in S8. Jon had bent the knee to Daenerys and reaffirmed his loyalty to her several times; in spite of this fact, Daenerys always feared Jon. It didn't matter what Jon personally wanted, Daenerys feared his mere existence as the true heir to the Iron Throne. As Arya pointed out, "he would always be a threat to her".

The only time Daenerys ever begged for anything was when she begged Jon to not reveal the truth about his heritage. Why do you think she was so desperate to keep his heritage a secret, despite knowing very well that he did not want the throne and was loyal to her?

And this is why Otto and Alicent are ultimately justified in being terrified for their children, if Rhaenyra were to take the throne. As Alicent told Aegon, he would challenge Rhaenyra simply by existing. No one would care about what Aegon wants, everyone would care about the simple fact that he's the firstborn son of the king. And that alone would challenge Rhaenyra's claim.

So, it wouldn't be enough if the Greens bent the knee. Jon also bent the knee for Daenerys, and it clearly wasn't enough. The only way that Rhaenyra's problems could be solved is if all of Alicent's male children were executed. That would remove all possibility of a rebellion being raised to place Aegon on the throne. And Otto and Alicent are smart enough to predict that Rhaenyra would likely understand this.

As Daenerys told Jon:

"Swear your brother and Samwell Tarly to secrecy and tell no one else or it will take a life of its own and you won't be able to control it or what it does to people, no matter how many times you bend the knee, no matter what you swear".

No matter how many oaths and how many times Aegon bent the knee to Rhaenyra, his mere existence would always be a threat that could be used as a valid casus belli by the nobles to rebel.

You can see now why Alicent was downright terrified for her children, rightfully so.

and at least tried to call for another Great Council to make his case to the nobles of the realm

The Great Council was for a completely different situation. Both of Jaehaerys' sons had died, it was a very special situation. Here however the king's firstborn son lived, so a Great Council wasn't required.

He wanted to avoid a war but he did more than anyone else to stoke the fires of conflict

It's the exact opposite. He did everything to avoid war. His first plan was to have Rhaenyra and her family slaughtered. It would be a cruel act of kinslaying but it would also ensure the stability as all rival claimants would be eliminated. His second plan was simply to along with Alicent and present generous terms of peace to Rhaenyra and her family. Rhaenyra was willing to make peace with the Greens and even said that King's Landing would have her answer the next day. Rhaenyra always cared about the White Walkers more than the throne. She didn't care about sitting on the throne, she just wanted the realm united against the White Walkers, even if it meant the usurpation went unpunished. It's only after Lucerys died that she has lost all will for peace.

The problem is that absolutely no one wanted war. Everyone was smart enough to understand that a civil war between dragons would leave the kingdom in ruins. Otto absolutely did not want war and tried to avoid it at all cost, as I just explained. Not even Aemond wanted war in the show. The war only starts because of an accident in which Aemond and Lucerys could not control their dragons. Before that, Otto actually got what he wanted. He got his grandson on the throne and he was able to convince Rhaenyra to accept the terms of peace.

Crowning Aegon is a very, very stupid move that was incredibly likely to backfire given the immense tensions already present between the parties.

It backfired because of circumstances that were beyond anyone's control. Arrax and Vhagar snapping and defying their riders' commands.

Otto is also a lot more interested in his family's power than Varys who of course doesn't have one.

Yeah but the point is that it's not JUST for the sake of his family.

For instance, Tywin only cared about his family. He started the War of the Five Kings because, as he explains to Jaime, they had to retaliate for Tyrion's kidnapping or they wouldn't be feared anymore. Aegon the Conqueror himself started wars with the entire continent because he wanted his family to rule everyone (which is also why it's hilarious that some Targaryen fans blame Otto for being powerhungry when Aegon the Conqueror was so powerhungry that he waged war on an entire continent).

Otto is different. Ofc he wants power for his family, like everyone else, but he also wants the stability of the realm and he absolutely did not want a war. Meanwhile, since Tywin and Aegon didn't care about stability, they were willing to wage wars with the rest of the continent for their family.

As for your last point, meh, guess we can say the same for Rhaenys who could have killed the Greens with but a word but didn't because reasons.

Rhaenys still thinks Rhaenyra had Laenor assassinated (which is indeed what happens in the books). Also, if she pulled the trigger, she wouldn't have killed just the new king and his family, but also the High Septon, the leader of the faith. You can bet that if the Dance of Dragons didn't start, a second Faith Uprising would have started instead. Oldtown, the largest city in the country, wouldn't have tolerated the death of their High Septon.

It just wasn't worth it. It wasn't worth it to commit all sorts of crimes for her son's murderer.

[Adamas102]

You don't rly get 50%/50% perfect ratio of said linege anyway, and no, its not a "outaded or ignorant", at least not in this case, either way, the subject was already dropped long time ago, i know you have to put your nose because sense of superiority but like i said, i know that already, you didn't had to say anything

Well this is where the outdated and ignorant part comes in because you very much do get a 50/50 contribution from each parent. Aemond having light colored hair doesn't mean that he inherited MORE hair genes from his father. It means either Targaryen hair color is dominant in a 50/50 split or the Hightowers have light color hair genes somewhere in their ancestry that they can still pass on. Half your genetic material comes from your father, the other half from your mother. Period. Just think for a moment how many issues babies would have if they didn't automatically get half their genetic code from each parents. There would be SO many more babies with genome gaps here and extra chromosomes there. It would not be good for reproductive survival of a species...

[MCMLXXXII]

Better to ignore the Alicent stan. Alicent, Alleria and probably Al Bundy too?

[Twdft]

Come on now, Al Bundy is a hero and one of the great minds of our time.

[Jastall]

Even if he wanted to keep Rhaenyra as heir, he still messed up when he recalled Otto for a second term. Against the advice of Daemon and Rhaenyra. Otto might have orchestrated the whole coup, but if the king was actually effective and strong, he wouldn't have been able to pull that shit.

Otto was able to usurp the throne for his bloodline only because Viserys was weak, it's from his weakness that everything started.

Is Otto the main culprit, for plotting the usurpation? Or is Viserys the main culprit, for giving so much power to Otto and failing to keep him under control?



He still wanted stability when he did that. Ofc he also wanted power and to see his bloodline on the throne, but that's the ambition of literally everyone in Westeros. The Targaryen dynasty was literally built by a dude who decided one day that he would be king of everything and everyone on the continent.

This doesn't change the fact that Otto's main goal was always the stability of the realm. Since the laws and traditions of Westeros always favoured men on matters of inheritance, Otto reasoned that many nobles would not accept a woman as the queen over the male's firstborn son (Aegon the Elder).

Rhaenys herself states early on in the show how the men of the realm would rather go to war than see a woman rule. Because the pre-established "order of things" always privileged men.

This is a crucial world-building point. The traditions and laws of Westeros have become too ingrained in the society, to the point that many would prefer to go to war than accept a queen as ruler. So you see? Otto's main goal was still stability, when he plotted to have his son usurp the throne. His belief that Rhaenyra's reign would be unstable is 100% reasonable and justified by simply looking at centuries of laws and traditions privileging men.

That's why, in the last episode, he laments how Rhaenyra and Viserys could never see the "truth". That, by virtue of "all laws of Gods and men", the King's firstborn male son is the rightful heir. The point here is not whether Otto was right or wrong to defy his king's wishes; the point here is that Otto is always thinking about what is best in terms of the stability of the realm. And in a very patriarchal and backward society like Westeros, a male ruler would likely ensure more stability than a female ruler.



It's not so simple, unfortunately. So long as Aegon and Aemond lived, rebellions could always be raised to push their claims, regardless of their own personal motivations. And the fact that the King's firstborn son lived could always be used as a way to discredit Rhaenyra's claim.

We see this fact very well with Daenerys and Jon in S8. It's one of the few things that made sense in S8. Jon had bent the knee to Daenerys and reaffirmed his loyalty to her several times; in spite of this fact, Daenerys always feared Jon. It didn't matter what Jon personally wanted, Daenerys feared his mere existence as the true heir to the Iron Throne. As Arya pointed out, "he would always be a threat to her".

The only time Daenerys ever begged for anything was when she begged Jon to not reveal the truth about his heritage. Why do you think she was so desperate to keep his heritage a secret, despite knowing very well that he did not want the throne and was loyal to her?

And this is why Otto and Alicent are ultimately justified in being terrified for their children, if Rhaenyra were to take the throne. As Alicent told Aegon, he would challenge Rhaenyra simply by existing. No one would care about what Aegon wants, everyone would care about the simple fact that he's the firstborn son of the king. And that alone would challenge Rhaenyra's claim.

So, it wouldn't be enough if the Greens bent the knee. Jon also bent the knee for Daenerys, and it clearly wasn't enough. The only way that Rhaenyra's problems could be solved is if all of Alicent's male children were executed. That would remove all possibility of a rebellion being raised to place Aegon on the throne. And Otto and Alicent are smart enough to predict that Rhaenyra would likely understand this.

As Daenerys told Jon:



No matter how many oaths and how many times Aegon bent the knee to Rhaenyra, his mere existence would always be a threat that could be used as a valid casus belli by the nobles to rebel.

You can see now why Alicent was downright terrified for her children, rightfully so.



The Great Council was for a completely different situation. Both of Jaehaerys' sons had died, it was a very special situation. Here however the king's firstborn son lived, so a Great Council wasn't required.



It's the exact opposite. He did everything to avoid war. His first plan was to have Rhaenyra and her family slaughtered. It would be a cruel act of kinslaying but it would also ensure the stability as all rival claimants would be eliminated. His second plan was simply to along with Alicent and present generous terms of peace to Rhaenyra and her family. Rhaenyra was willing to make peace with the Greens and even said that King's Landing would have her answer the next day. Rhaenyra always cared about the White Walkers more than the throne. She didn't care about sitting on the throne, she just wanted the realm united against the White Walkers, even if it meant the usurpation went unpunished. It's only after Lucerys died that she has lost all will for peace.

The problem is that absolutely no one wanted war. Everyone was smart enough to understand that a civil war between dragons would leave the kingdom in ruins. Otto absolutely did not want war and tried to avoid it at all cost, as I just explained. Not even Aemond wanted war in the show. The war only starts because of an accident in which Aemond and Lucerys could not control their dragons. Before that, Otto actually got what he wanted. He got his grandson on the throne and he was able to convince Rhaenyra to accept the terms of peace.



It backfired because of circumstances that were beyond anyone's control. Arrax and Vhagar snapping and defying their riders' commands.


Yeah but the point is that it's not JUST for the sake of his family.

For instance, Tywin only cared about his family. He started the War of the Five Kings because, as he explains to Jaime, they had to retaliate for Tyrion's kidnapping or they wouldn't be feared anymore. Aegon the Conqueror himself started wars with the entire continent because he wanted his family to rule everyone (which is also why it's hilarious that some Targaryen fans blame Otto for being powerhungry when Aegon the Conqueror was so powerhungry that he waged war on an entire continent).

Otto is different. Ofc he wants power for his family, like everyone else, but he also wants the stability of the realm and he absolutely did not want a war. Meanwhile, since Tywin and Aegon didn't care about stability, they were willing to wage wars with the rest of the continent for their family.



Rhaenys still thinks Rhaenyra had Laenor assassinated (which is indeed what happens in the books). Also, if she pulled the trigger, she wouldn't have killed just the new king and his family, but also the High Septon, the leader of the faith. You can bet that if the Dance of Dragons didn't start, a second Faith Uprising would have started instead. Oldtown, the largest city in the country, wouldn't have tolerated the death of their High Septon.

It just wasn't worth it. It wasn't worth it to commit all sorts of crimes for her son's murderer.

Oh come on, blaming Viserys for Otto's actions is just dumb now, especially since much of Otto's scheming happened while Viserys was half dead. He has a right to believe his Hand to be loyal. You really seem to be ping-ponging on who has agency in the story based on whatever suits your current argument.

And sigh. I didn't say Otto wanted war. I said his maneuverings fueled the fire, as the did the actions of a fair few other people. You're attacking a point I did not make as I've repeatedly said the Dance was caused by many factors, it wasn't just a case of him being the big bad.

How is the situation not special? The king named an heir, against tradition but an heir all the same, is now dead, one party believes the named heir should be queen and another that his son should be king. This is the exact sort of situation that calls for something like a Great Council. You know, to settle the matter, defuse tensions and stabilize (!) the realm. Crowning one party and then asking if it was OK after is not the play at all. It doesn't defuse shit.

Lucerys dying was merely the spark on top of a powder keg decades in the making, trying to frame that as the one unforeseeable thing that suddenly blew up the conflict is very disingenuous.

[Varodoc]

Oh come on, blaming Viserys for Otto's actions is just dumb now.

No, it's not. Viserys failed in keeping Otto under control. He was the king, and he couldn't even ensure the fidelity of his own council. Anyone with common sense would never take loyalty for granted in the capital. This is one of the basic lessons Baelish teaches Sansa right off the bat.

As a side note, it's funny how this thread was (falsely; mistakenly) claiming a few weeks ago that Viserys was an absolute monarch with absolute power; well, he certainly failed in keeping Otto under control and preventing the usurpation of his own throne with his "absolute power", if that was the case.

especially since much of Otto's scheming happened while Viserys was half dead.

He was not half-dead when he recalled Otto for a second term against the advices of Daemon and Rhaenyra.

I'm not saying that Daemon and Rhaenya were justified in wanting to keep Otto away from the court. I'm saying that, FROM VISERYS' PERSPECTIVE, he already knew that Otto was kind of problematic, because the two people he loves the most (his brother and his daughter) told him so. So, FROM VISERYS' PERSPECTIVE, it shouldn't have been a good idea to bring Otto back.

He has a right to believe his Hand to be loyal

His belief in Otto clearly didn't stop him from firing him once. Evidently Viserys was not going to let his personal opinion stop him from firing his friend. If he wanted to bring him back for a second time, he should have at least paid more attention, knowing full well (From the first time) that he was scheming something behind the scenes. That he never got a clue is just one more reason why Viserys is remembered in the history books of Westeros as a weakling who planted the seeds of the civil war during his reign.

You really seem to be ping-ponging on who has agency in the story based on whatever suits your current argument.

Nope. Since the very beginning, my argument has been cohesive, coherent, and logical, and took into account multiple statements from the source material. I'm not "ping-ponging" anything.

Me blaming Viserys for failing to keep Otto in-check and me saying that Viserys is the main culprit doesn't mean I'm removing agency from Otto. It's just as I said at the beginning. Otto staged a coup d'état and usurped the throne; But he was able to pull so much shit behind the scenes only because control and scrutiny from the king was non-existent.

And sigh. I didn't say Otto wanted war.

You said, and I quote:

like come on, there's no way such an act doesn't lead to at least some level of conflict.

Otto's usurpation of the throne didn't lead to any conflict. This is my point. If nothing ever happened at Storm's End, Rhaenyra would have accepted the peace terms, Aegon would have remained on the throne, and the kingdom would have united to face the White Walkers threat. Rhaenyra was very clear that, despite acknowledging that her throne was usurped, she still sought peace. Otto himself provided the terms of peace. None of Otto's actions led to any kind of conflict. Conflict, of any kind, only started because Aemond rightfully held a grudge against the child who maimed him for life, mutilated his face, and continued to bully him at a family gathering (laughing blatantly in Aemond's face); and Lucerys failed to control his dragon Arrax, who damaged Vhagar in the face and could have easily incinerated Aemond instead. All these actions were beyond Otto's control.

Lastly, you tried to connect your assumption that Otto's actions led to some kind of conflict, with the idea that Otto did not care about stability. I'm saying, as explained above, that Otto's actions did not lead to any conflict of any kind (there was no conflict before Storm's End). Consequently, as his actions did not lead to any conflict, we know that Otto indeed sought stability above everything else. His actions proved it.

Otto even risked his life, going to Dragonstone (the house of crazy unstable Daemon), to present peace terms to Rhaenyra and avoid war at all cost. The story portrayal clearly presents Otto as a schemer and an opportunist who seeks stability as his main motivation.

I said his maneuverings fueled the fire

You said (and I quoted) that his usurpation of the throne led to some kind of conflict. I'm telling you that peace would have been maintained in spite of his usurpation, because Otto went to great pains to come up with reasonable and generous terms of peace for Rhaenyra, and even risked his own life to present those terms directly to Rhaenyra at Dragonstone.

Aemond holding a (rightful) grudge and Lucerys failing to control his dragon cannot be traced back to Otto's usurpation. Peace would have been maintained, Rhaenyra was ready to give up her throne for peace.

How is the situation not special? The king named an heir, against tradition but an heir all the same, is now dead, one party believes the named heir should be queen and another that his son should be king. This is the exact sort of situation that calls for something like a Great Council.

The laws of Westeros (which have been in place for many centuries) clearly state that the firstborn son is the rightful king, this was reminded to the audience by Vaemond in ep.8. The Great Council was not required. The laws are clear and the laws of Westeros favoured Aegon. There's nothing to discuss at a Great Council. Choosing Rhaenyra over Aegon means breaking centuries of laws and traditions, that's not the purpose of the Great Council.

You said the Great Council exists to clear the matters of succession. If the Great Council juxtaposed Rhaenyra's claim to Aegon's, they would basically be saying that centuries of laws and traditions on the matter of succession can be thrown in the trash bin.

There was no need for the Great Council as there was nothing to discuss. By all laws of Westeros, Aegon was the rightful king. Viserys' word is not law and Viserys himself acknowledged that he did not exist above tradition.

Crowning one party and then asking if it was OK after is not the play at all

Otto didn't ask this to Rhaenyra. Aegon was going to be king whether she liked it or not, because laws, traditions, and all signs of legitimacy (crown and sword of the Conqueror, support of the High Septon, the Iron Throne, the acknowledgment of the masses etc.) belonged to him. He didn't ask Rhaenyra if it was "ok" to crown him. He gave Rhaenyra generous peace terms, such as the recognition that Lucerys was the rightful heir to Driftmark. And Rhaenyra was considering those terms of peace and was ready to accept them, hence why Daemon lost his sanity and literally tried to kill her, by choking her.

Lucerys dying was merely the spark on top of a powder keg decades in the making, trying to frame that as the one unforeseeable thing that suddenly blew up the conflict is very disingenuous.

It's literally what happened.

Rhaenyra made it clear to Daemon that the White Walkers and Aegon's prophecy mattered more to her than the Iron Throne. Which is why Daemon went crazy and tried to kill her in the first place. Because Rhaenyra absolutely did not want war, while Daemon was out for blood.

Had the fight over Storm's End not happened (more like a slaughter than a fight really, but I digress); the terms of peace likely would have been accepted.

The point that is brought up many times throughout the story is that everyone knows that a civil war between dragons would be a disaster for everyone. The show literally opens with a narration of how Jahaerys, wise and cunning, knew that the only thing that could end the Targaryen dynasty was an internal civil war.

Everyone understood this truth (except for Daemon, but psychos like him are locked up in mental asylums for a reason). Rhaenyra knew, from Aegon's prophecy, that a threat to the entire world of men was coming. The absolute last thing she wanted was a civil war, as that would leave the kingdom too weak to fight against the great threat of the north.

She only goes to war after she has been broken mentally by the death of her child. Which, again, was not something Otto intended.

[RH92]

Jesus, can we get rid of this fool? The thread was peaceful and now it is a shitstorm.

[Jastall]

Better to ignore the Alicent stan. Alicent, Alleria and probably Al Bundy too?

Yeah, the stanning is getting overboard. I feel like I at least tried to engage in good faith but when what I'm saying is twisted into things I did not say, when character agency is ignored whenever convenient and when all members of a side are demonized while the failings of the other characters are systematically downplayed, I feel like there isn't much point to furthering the discussion.

[Syegfryed]

Well this is where the outdated and ignorant part comes in because you very much do get a 50/50 contribution from each parent.

Each parent, not each lineage, Rhaenyra was not 100% Targeryan for her son to be 50% targeryan, Targeryan blood was diminished with each generation and her sons are one generation down.

And you are calling people ignorant, is a perfect example of dunning kruger, there is also not a point in talking about the rest of your comment, as it was, again, something we already discussed and reach a consensus, you can read those if you are bored

[Jinnobi]

Jesus, can we get rid of this fool? The thread was peaceful and now it is a shitstorm.

This is the second time you called for the "removal" of a member of this website from a thread because of a debate. Nothing more.

If you suggest this thinly-veiled thought policing a third time, I'm going to personally message every single moderator and administrator I can find on MMO-Champion and provide links to your posts. Your line of reasoning isn't just absurd - it sets a dangerous precedent. "Conform to the majority opinion or else."

I've never once, in over 20 years of posting on forums of all kinds, run into a poster who made a general appeal to "get rid of someone" because of a disagreement in a thread: moreover, a disagreement that you're not actively engaging in. No one is breaking any of the rules of this forum; your reasoning is based on the incredibly flimsy "this thread was peaceful until he arrived" nonsense. This is a forum. Debating is not only expected, it's commonplace.

Grow up and get used to it.

- - - Updated - - -

Otto certainly was pleased but Daemon also had nothing to do with his subsequent maneuvering to ensure Alicent married Viserys and then have her son be under his wing and placed on the throne.

I hate this line of reasoning. Asking/telling your near-adult daughter to take a book and read to the king in his grief isn't "ensuring" anything. Otto put his daughter in a position where she could spend some time with Viserys alone. It's made very clear - both in the show and the books - that Alicent wasn't some prostitute who tempted Viserys to make bad choices. She won him over by being herself. If anything, Viserys married for love and duty, not duty alone: if he was only interested in duty, he would have married Laena, as he already stated to Rhaenyra.

The only time Viserys was playing the "you set me up with Alicent on purpose" card was when Viserys was in the process of conjuring reasons to fire Otto as Hand; along with the incredibly flimsy implication that Otto somehow made Baelon's appendix burst. If you actually think both reasons Viserys gave Otto for firing him, it becomes clear that Otto exclaiming "that's absurd" is entirely correct:

1) You manipulated me into marrying Alicent because I was sad and vulnerable (6 months after his wife's death)
2) You made my dad die of a burst belly (the Westerosi term for "appendicitis")

There's a reason Viserys immediately reinstated Otto as Hand of the King after Strong Sr. died: Viserys didn't even believe his own excuses. He was "forced" by Rhaenyra to fire Otto or else she wouldn't marry Laenor.

The perspective that Otto somehow manipulated Viserys into marrying Alicent is feeble. It's also something practically everyone has considered in-universe and has apparently been rejected as no one ever mentions it again (even in opportunities where it would be potent ammunition for furthering argument).