It would be for the best if Aegon Targaryen chose to never set one foot on Westeros and went to Essos instead to conquer.

 

Would it? Before Aegon the Kingdoms were almost always at war. The massively reduced size of the Nights Watch (which is probably because these inter-region wars have died down) attests to that.

Hashasheen: I concede your points. I had not properly researched many aspects of this (though the Blackfyre aspect was based off the Golden Company and the Blackfyre!Aegon theory).

But all that aside, you've still lost at least 510,000 men, women and children in King's Landing, and for what? The first estimate I could find puts the entire loss of the canon events at 150,000-250,000.

Canon is going to continue, of course, and more will be lost to Daenerys and so on before all is said and done. But this disaster would not solve the underlying tensions in Westeros. The Martell, Stark, and Tully ones, perhaps, but not the Frey, Bolton, and so on.

And this chaos will leapfrog Littlefinger up the ranks all the quicker. Given the relevant High brides available, there's still a good chance for a Cersei/Robert marriage, which would remain a disaster even without Jamie. The disruption to trade by losing the biggest of Westeros' few ports will be enormous. Balon Greyjoy still wants to return to reaving. And however much you want to belittle it, the Nights Watch is still critically undermassed with a Wildling migration to escape the Others gathering steam. And so on.

 

Possibly more, as much as 500,000. It'll also nuke the economy of the Crownlands, which will leave it open for annexation by Robert into the Stormlands following the end of the war.

... I nuke a city, and you say canon will continue? Daenerys's father just murdered a city. How much more do you need to strangle the Targaryen cause in exile? Hell, all it needs is the Lannisters wanting the Targaryens dead or Robert to do the same and shits over. And that's leaving aside your assumptions tha the Martell, Stark, Tully, Frey, Bolton situations are gonna turn out the same way.

Do you think if Washington DC was nuked in World War 1 that things would turn out to be the same?

How. How does Littefinger climb up the ranks? It took him fifteen years to become Master of Coin, and that was with Jon Arryn promoting the guy after years of hardwork at Gulltown. There's no King's Landing to put the guy in to make money for Robert. We're talking about multi-year butterflies from this singular Tunguska-level event and you're chatting about a wildling migration and Balon Greyjoy?

If I nuked Texas in WW2, does that mean Japan wins the war? Or that Ronald Reagan becomes president twenty to thirty years early?

 

You misunderstood me. I was saying that in the nuke scenario, 510,000 people die, whereas in canon 150,000-250,000 die, and thus your scenario is worse.

I then allowed that canon will continue from ADWD, so my comparison was slightly unfair, inasmuch as more people may yet die from the aftermath of TWo5K to be more comparable to the wildfire scenario.

I'm not saying canon is continuing post-nuke, entirely the opposite. That being said

By removing Kings Landing you may emerge with a less conflict-sown Westeros, especially with regard to the Martell, Stark and Tully ones, which is where your happy scenario comes from, and I acknowledge this. However, a) there are substantive underlying tensions that still breed conflict, and b) is that worth the cost of 500,000 lives? I would say it is not.

Robert is in a position where he has to found a capital for the Seven Kingdoms for him to rule from. This could go in an already existing castle (Harrenhal, Storms End), on the ruins of Kings Landing itself, or in a random Vale field he pissed in. It'll probably go on the east coast somewhere, realistically speaking, but it doesn't matter. This is going to necessitate rebuilding the (minimal) bureaucracy from the ground up, giving the conquerors enormous power in how this comes about. Robert being who Robert is, this probably goes to Jon Arryn, whose wife Littlefinger has substantial power over. Thus, I can see Littlefingers career going similarly to canon, if anything moving faster.

Are there alternative ways events could unfold? Sure. Are they more likely? Perhaps. But that's not my point. My point is that your nuke has not acted as a panacea, excising the evil from Westeros, but that the circumstances still exist that could bring about instability, internal war, and disaster to Westeros. And that there must be a very high bar for a 500,000-death-nuke to be at all justified as better than canon, let alone a 'happy ending'.


The wildlings are an even worse example, as they are very far disconnected from events in the South.

If I nuke Cairo in 1200 AD, does that have any effect on Genghis' horde riding west?


Do you understand where I'm coming from?

 

a) Tensions and conflicts easily addressed in canon RE Greyjoy or completely in consquential to Westeros RE Targaryen.
b) Yeah, pretty much is. King's Landing is a bleeding sore on the face of Westeros, and the decimation of multiple problematic figures in one swift blows takes the chessboard into a whole new setting.

If he picks Storm's End, then he's already got the basic buracreacy in mind and will probably appoint first from the Stormlands. However intelligent or talented Littlefinger might be, you're making an incorrect assumption that he'll follow the same path in life. Jon Arryn might well decide not to give this guy a job at Gulltown, or might give him a job elsewhere. There is no substantive argument for Littlefinger to wind up in the same place doing the same job in a completely different world.

There is indeed a high bar. It's called the War of 5 Kings, which doesn't happen now because the major problem players have been cleared from the deck. The tens of thousands of lives dead there and the ravages of war sustained less than two decades after Robert's Rebellion and less than a decade after the Greyjoy Rebellion won't happen. The Lannister influence at court that helps drive the realm into chaos and attracts the ire of the Iron Bank doesn't happen. The collapse of the Targaryen cause with no visible blame to House Baratheon helps maintain the realm's peace, especially with Dorne.

And they're a northern problem addressed time and time again without difficult. In a world where RObb Stark isn't leading the levies south, Eddard Stark is available to handle the wildlings and begin preparing against the Others.

Yes, because Khan isn't gonna go to that post-apocalyptic city where people are dying of cancer and lesions, which will have poisoned the entirety of the Nile and killed tens if not hundreds of thousands of people. He'll probably stick with Eastern Europe, let the Middle East die off of radiation spread and make cancer a big thing there.

 

Different choice: Daeron Targaryen confesses to his father that he lied about being wronged by Ser Duncan.

Result: No trial by seven. Aerion is handily beaten by Duncan, but that hardly matters. What's important is that Baelor Targaryen is not fatally wounded by Maekar and thus remains the heir to the throne. While there's still a chance he dies during the Great Spring Sickness in 209, I'll assume he makes it. Maekar I never becomes king, and neither does Aegon the Unlikely who probably spends his days following around Duncan the Tall. Summerhall probably still stands. The Mad King is either never born or never has any power, thus preventing 90% of the plot of the series.

The world is slightly poorer (For instance, Dunk never becomes Lord Commander of the Kingsguard and I'm not sure what happens to the Night's Watch if Aemon isn't around) but otherwise substantially better off. Still might have some problems with the White Walkers though...

 

I, for one, completely, and I do mean 'completely,' support burning King's Landing TO THE MOTHERFUCKING GROUND!

FLAMES FOR DAYS!

:fire:fire:fire:fire:fire:fire:fire:fire:fire:fire:fire:fire:fire:fire:fire:fire

 

Why do you assume the Realm would survive the burning of King's Landing?

I feel that once the capital of Westeros no longer exist, the different kingdom would seek their independence, having no longer any mechanism to keep them together.

 

All I got from this thread is that Hashasheen really, really wants to defend the fact that his players burned KL to the ground.


As for the OP of the thread, I would argue that canon is heading into a pretty happy ending (all things considered), already.

By which I mean that the Others invade and kill absolutely everyone.

 

They do have mechanisms to keep them together.

Marriages and money.

...and more importantly, the army marshaled behind Robert. Push for even more weakening of the Crown? Of course. But going there own separate ways is a bigger shock than you think, and not necessarily that easy.

...strictly speaking, they didn't. NPCs did, xP

 

I'd say you'd be well on your way to creating a happy ending by having Hoster choose not to foster Petyr Baelish.

Petyr never falls in love with Cat or seduces Lysa. Never duels Brandon. Never gains ambition and hatred of the system.

It also likely means he never comes to the attention of Jon Arryn, who never appoints him to the council. He never assassinates Jon Arryn. Maybe Jon Arryn even gets news of Cersei's infidelity to Robert.

All in all a very healthy set of butterflies from nothing coming of Petyr Baelish.

 

Yeah, no, that doesn't split the realm. If anything it unites it far more than in OTL.


@Hashashen Well, agree to disagree. You place more weight on the corruption of KL, and the suffering of the Kingdoms, I on the all their lives. I think you're also weighting the butterflies with a too optimistic presumption. But mostly the disagreement is coming from the values we see in the respective outcome, which isn't about to change.

 

Strictly speaking, I burned King's Landing to the ground. :fire