Game of Thrones begins....

[Norgy]

By episode four this season, it's rather obvious Tommen is completely useless.

The Kingslayer is, in my opinion, the best character in the TV series. From completely unlikeable to somewhat sympathic.

Season five so far seems a bit tighter and with less boring storylines.

"Some" aren't. 

We are on episode three

[Martinus]

Yeah. The claim that Stannis is the "one true king" is laughable. If the crown is claimed through blood then Daenerys has a better claim. If we accept that Targaeryens could have been legitimately usurped by Baratheons through the victory at the Red Fork, then Baratheons have been usurped by Lannisters through the victory at Blackwater, and Tommen has a better claim.

Either way, I can't wait for Brienne to kill his fratricidal ass.

Tommen is the king because of his claim to be the lawful heir of the Baratheon dynasty.  Stannis is the one true king because he is the lawful heir of the Baratheon dynasty.  But he has to defeat the pretender first.

That is exactly my point - Baratheons only won the throne because they defeated the rightful king in battle and got crowned as kings. Which is exactly what Tywin Lannister has done for Joffrey and then Tommen.

The argument of Stannis fanboys that Stannis's claim is somehow stronger than that of Tommen is laughable - Robert was an usurper and so was Joffrey. Both got the throne through conquest. If Stannis has a claim to the throne because he is a brother of the dead usurper, so does Tommen.

[Martinus]

By episode four this season, it's rather obvious Tommen is completely useless.

The Kingslayer is, in my opinion, the best character in the TV series. From completely unlikeable to somewhat sympathic.

Season five so far seems a bit tighter and with less boring storylines.

"Some" aren't. 

We are on episode three

Berkut is going to chew your head off now.

But yeah, episode 4 is sweet.

[Berkut]

Nobody claimed that Robert was the "rightful" heir to the throne of the Targearyns. He had no "claim" by birthright, he conquered them. That established a new dynasty.

Tywin has not claimed that Joffrey was king by right of conquest, but rather because he was the rightful heir of Robert. He was willing to fight to protect that claim, but it is not at all the same as a claim of right by conquest.

This really isn't that hard to understand.

Stannis is the "rightful" heir by birth as the heir of Robert Baratheon, who claimed the throne by conquest. If you accept that claim by conquest, then the next "rightful" king is Stannis. If you do NOT accept that claim, then the next rightful heir is Daenyrs. There is no way the correct heir is Tommen unless you reject the notion that he is illegitimate.


It's not like there is an established succession system that just says "When the king dies, we will have a war and whoever wins gets to be the new king!"

I cannot stand Stannis, but there is no question that his claim is stronger than Tommen's...once you accept that Tommen is a bastard by Jaime. The Lannister claim is based on birth, not conquest. If they all stood up and said "Yeah, Tommen is not Robert's heir, but we are going to claim the throne anyway" then a lot of houses would not support them that currently support them based on the strength of his claim as the heir of Robert.

[Norgy]

Berkut is going to chew your head off now.

But yeah, episode 4 is sweet.

My head has been chewed off by so many here, I am unsure what is left of it.

And, yes, I watched the pirated stuff. Because I am one impatient bastard.

I don't really care who has the better claim. I see GoT partly as a lesson in storytelling.
My girlfriend is absolutely unimpressed. "It's like watching a soap with swords".

[crazy canuck]

Yeah. The claim that Stannis is the "one true king" is laughable. If the crown is claimed through blood then Daenerys has a better claim. If we accept that Targaeryens could have been legitimately usurped by Baratheons through the victory at the Red Fork, then Baratheons have been usurped by Lannisters through the victory at Blackwater, and Tommen has a better claim.

Either way, I can't wait for Brienne to kill his fratricidal ass.

Tommen is the king because of his claim to be the lawful heir of the Baratheon dynasty.  Stannis is the one true king because he is the lawful heir of the Baratheon dynasty.  But he has to defeat the pretender first.

That is exactly my point - Baratheons only won the throne because they defeated the rightful king in battle and got crowned as kings. Which is exactly what Tywin Lannister has done for Joffrey and then Tommen.

The argument of Stannis fanboys that Stannis's claim is somehow stronger than that of Tommen is laughable - Robert was an usurper and so was Joffrey. Both got the throne through conquest. If Stannis has a claim to the throne because he is a brother of the dead usurper, so does Tommen.

Berkut has already responded to your post and described why you are wrong.  But to repeat,  Joffrey didn't become king because of a battle.  He became king because he was presented as the heir of Robert Baratheon.   The battle ensued because Stannis learned that Joffrey was not the son of Robert but was instead the bastard son of an incestuous relationship.   This is the fundamental plot line in the early books... 

Tommen also is king because of his claim to be a Baratheon heir.

[crazy canuck]

I don't really care who has the better claim. I see GoT partly as a lesson in storytelling.
My girlfriend is absolutely unimpressed. "It's like watching a soap with swords".

The issue of the validity of the conflicting claims is somewhat important to understanding the plot.

[grumbler]

Nobody claimed that Robert was the "rightful" heir to the throne of the Targearyns. He had no "claim" by birthright, he conquered them. That established a new dynasty.

Tywin has not claimed that Joffrey was king by right of conquest, but rather because he was the rightful heir of Robert. He was willing to fight to protect that claim, but it is not at all the same as a claim of right by conquest.

This really isn't that hard to understand.

Stannis is the "rightful" heir by birth as the heir of Robert Baratheon, who claimed the throne by conquest. If you accept that claim by conquest, then the next "rightful" king is Stannis. If you do NOT accept that claim, then the next rightful heir is Daenyrs. There is no way the correct heir is Tommen unless you reject the notion that he is illegitimate.


It's not like there is an established succession system that just says "When the king dies, we will have a war and whoever wins gets to be the new king!"

I cannot stand Stannis, but there is no question that his claim is stronger than Tommen's...once you accept that Tommen is a bastard by Jaime. The Lannister claim is based on birth, not conquest. If they all stood up and said "Yeah, Tommen is not Robert's heir, but we are going to claim the throne anyway" then a lot of houses would not support them that currently support them based on the strength of his claim as the heir of Robert.

Indeed.  The concept of legitimacy may not matter to Marti, but in the historical time period modeled by the fiction, it was very powerful, indeed.  Claims by right of conquest were rare, because it opened up the question of "why you, then, and not me?"

Marti, read the books.  They explain all if this better than the TV show.  Tommen and Jeoffrey both claimed the throne by right of inheritance, not conquest.

[Neil]

Yeah. The claim that Stannis is the "one true king" is laughable. If the crown is claimed through blood then Daenerys has a better claim. If we accept that Targaeryens could have been legitimately usurped by Baratheons through the victory at the Red Fork, then Baratheons have been usurped by Lannisters through the victory at Blackwater, and Tommen has a better claim.

Either way, I can't wait for Brienne to kill his fratricidal ass.

Why are you still a Renly supporter?
He tried to usurp Stannis claim to the throne, and lost.
Natural selection. He selected himself out by not taking out Stannis, clearly his main rival, before attempting to march to King's Landing.

Martinus' love of Renly is based entirely on the fact that Renly was a homo.

[Habbaku]

Nobody claimed that Robert was the "rightful" heir to the throne of the Targearyns. He had no "claim" by birthright, he conquered them. That established a new dynasty.

Just to nitpick a little, this isn't entirely accurate.  Robert has a sort of claim through his grandmother.  He is 1/4th Targaryen, as are his brothers.  The claim isn't exactly strong, and he still acquired his throne by conquest, but it's more like a cadet branch taking over (see: Bourbons/Valois).

Impossible to quibble with the rest, unless you're Martinus.

[Berkut]

Nobody claimed that Robert was the "rightful" heir to the throne of the Targearyns. He had no "claim" by birthright, he conquered them. That established a new dynasty.

Just to nitpick a little, this isn't entirely accurate.  Robert has a sort of claim through his grandmother.  He is 1/4th Targaryen, as are his brothers.  The claim isn't exactly strong, and he still acquired his throne by conquest, but it's more like a cadet branch taking over (see: Bourbons/Valois).

Impossible to quibble with the rest, unless you're Martinus.

I thought about mentioning that, but figured it would just confuse the issue a bit.

But this actually reinforces the point. Everyone knows Robert took the throne by force, and was not at all a legitimate successor to the Targaeryns, but the reason Robert was king instead of say Ned was because of that tenuous relationship to the Targaeryn family, providing some kind of fig leaf of legitimacy. It shows just how important this is at this time - even though everyone knows Robert took the throne simply by force, that fig leaf is still critical.

And this makes sense when you think about it - it isn't just about who is king. It is about who is a Lord, and who is the rightful heir to any number of houses great and small. Maintaining the concept of some kind of ordered succession, with rule by conquest being VERY much the exception, is critical to the stability of the realm overall. When that stability breaks down, one of the primary goals of the people fighting is simply to restore it in some plausible fashion.

Tommen is not king because the Lannisters beat Stannis. He is king because a significant number of those who decide SAY he is king. Winning a battle helps, but it is putting the cart before the horse to say he is king by conquest. He certainly is not.

[Josquius]

What I don't get about the ASOIAFverse is the almost complete lack of cousins.
The lannisters have some but nobody else seems to. You would think that neds dad would have had brothers or at least his grandad.
But no. For cadet branches of the Starks you've just the karstarks who split off way back in the depths of time

[Eddie Teach]

Well, sending off surplus sons to the Wall doesn't help in that regard.

[crazy canuck]

Well, sending off surplus sons to the Wall doesn't help in that regard.

Not to mention the last war.

[Martinus]

What I don't get about the ASOIAFverse is the almost complete lack of cousins.
The lannisters have some but nobody else seems to. You would honk that neds dad would have had brothers or at least his grandad.
But no. For cadet branches of the Starks you've just the karstarks who split off way back in the depths of time

We only really get deeper into Stark and Lannister family relations - everybody else is not really relevant as there are no succession issues, but I would imagine Dorne, Iron Islands, the Vale etc. would be crawling with cousins.

Starks apparently have a tendency to die without issue. There have also been several females in the family who were married off to Royces and Karstarks.

My understanding of Northern/Winterfellian succession rules is that pure blood relations are not enough for a claim - you also have to be of the right house - and women join houses of their husbands upon marriage, thus their children do not get to inherit from their maternal grandfathers.

I suppose there may also be a tendency to send off extra siblings/sons to the Wall.