Game of Thrones begins....

[Martinus]

Vlad Tepes? A lot of nobles in the Balkans, Ukraine or Russia weren't exactly saints either. Remember that the North represents the least civilized part of Westeros/Europe.

[Razgovory]

I didn't think there was historical counterparts for most of the characters.

[Razgovory]

Vlad Tepes?

Also gay.

[jimmy olsen]

So... can we ask a dance of dragons question here?

[spoiler]Is there any historical medieval  counterpart to RAmsay Bolton? Who would tolerate such a crazy monster?[/spoiler]

Ivan the Terrible?

[Siege]

So... can we ask a dance of dragons question here?

[spoiler]Is there any historical medieval  counterpart to RAmsay Bolton? Who would tolerate such a crazy monster?[/spoiler]

Roose Bolton is far more interesting.
The dude is willing to let his children kill each other so the most fit inherit his domain.

[LaCroix]

Roose Bolton is far more interesting.
The dude is willing to let his children kill each other so the most fit inherit his domain.

Roose seemed to me the most pragmatic person in the entire universe. he recognized the fact his bastard murdered his legitimate son, yet legitimized the surviving son because of the very fact that it was his only son. he regretted Ramsay's murder of Domeric, but because Ramsay was his blood and only surviving son, he allowed him to remain alive

i hope they keep the two separate characters in the HBO series, and don't merge them into one

[Josquius]

I hate the character of Bolton. At first he seemed rather cool. A northerner named after a shitty northern town who lived somewhere called the Dread Fort yet was a good guy. Was a kind of nifty subversion of the "so cliched it isn't even done any more" fantasy stuff of calling bad guy's castles "Fort Doom" and the like.
But it turned out he was bad afterall. Ah.

[LaCroix]

So... can we ask a dance of dragons question here?

[spoiler]Is there any historical medieval  counterpart to RAmsay Bolton? Who would tolerate such a crazy monster?[/spoiler]

are you asking if there is an historical example of a person who because of his position of power is allowed to commit acts of utter horrific sadism? think on this, if you would

[LaCroix]

I hate the character of Bolton. At first he seemed rather cool. A northerner named after a shitty northern town who lived somewhere called the Dread Fort yet was a good guy. Was a kind of nifty subversion of the "so cliched it isn't even done any more" fantasy stuff of calling bad guy's castles "Fort Doom" and the like.
But it turned out he was bad afterall. Ah.

do you hate him because of personal reasons? i rather like him. he is interesting, and provides a reasonable exploration of the once vassal who is willing to do whatever it takes to take his and his family's position to the next level. only Roose was in the position to step up to the Lannisters and maintain control over the north--even if it eventually leads to despair for his house

[The Larch]

I hate the character of Bolton. At first he seemed rather cool. A northerner named after a shitty northern town who lived somewhere called the Dread Fort yet was a good guy. Was a kind of nifty subversion of the "so cliched it isn't even done any more" fantasy stuff of calling bad guy's castles "Fort Doom" and the like.
But it turned out he was bad afterall. Ah.

Good guy? He was creepy as hell since minute one.

[Josquius]

Creepy, certainly.
But on the good side at least.
His creepyness being another factor in it being lame he was the one who turned out bad.

[The Larch]

Creepy, certainly.
But on the good side at least.
His creepyness being another factor in it being lame he was the one who turned out bad.

Which good side? The Starks? If these books have proved something is that every side is a mixed bag of goodies and baddies.

[Josquius]

I knew that'd be the reply...
But yeah. The Starks. They're quite unquestionably "the good guys"- a big point of the books being that being good and honorable gets you screwed over by those who play to win.

[Faeelin]

are you asking if there is an historical example of a person who because of his position of power is allowed to commit acts of utter horrific sadism? think on this, if you would

Sure. I can think of plenty of awful people. But I can't think of that many people who were evil towards their own subjects for the LOLZ YAY.

[Martinus]

are you asking if there is an historical example of a person who because of his position of power is allowed to commit acts of utter horrific sadism? think on this, if you would

Sure. I can think of plenty of awful people. But I can't think of that many people who were evil towards their own subjects for the LOLZ YAY.

There aren't many kings (and rulers of nations) like this, but I would be surprised if this was that rare among local tyrants (the equivalent of counts and barons in CK2) who had absolute authority over their subjects. In fact, I can't think of a single reason why a petty lord could not be a psychopath.