Voska? Did you read the books? Because in the books, it tells a "COMPLETE" other story than what you say. And so he is screwing his sister? So what. Many of the Targerian kings did the same. Please do not bring your morality to a society that has really diffrent values.
Yeah have read the books the show makes him out to be not that bad of guy. The books make him out to be much worse.
It's what he does to continue screwing his sister that makes him evil not the fact that he did. I'm applying Pathfinder alignments to this society. That is what the thread is about.
In the books he killed one of his guards.
In the series he murdered his cousin just for a distraction, which is way, way worse.
He had nothing to do with the order to kill the princess and her children, nor did he really care about his children getting the throne. In fact, he doesn't even really consider Joffrey his child...Cersei kept him at arm's length to avoid any suspicion.
He had nothing to do with the order to kill the princess and her children, nor did he really care about his children getting the throne. In fact, he doesn't even really consider Joffrey his child...Cersei kept him at arm's length to avoid any suspicion.
As a kings guard he should have protected the children and the queen. He could justify killing the king as he was mad and planned to kill everyone including his own grand kids and daughter inlaw. The prince Oberyn of Dorn makes that point clear in the book.
I'd say he cared deeply for Joffery even though he was at arms length. In the books when Tyrion lies to Jamies saying he did kill Joffery and he he do it again, Jamie is devastated by that. I think that is the real turning point for Jamie when realizes everything he's done ends up with his son being poisoned. Cerci goes paranoid and Jamie decides to be the knight he never was.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Jamie started the show as a fallen paladin, but not an Antipaladin. Neutral Evil, I think. Chaotic Evil might also be appropriate, as his formative experiences (i.e. slaying the Mad King and getting nothing but grief for it) have soured him on the concept of Law and Good considerably, but he's not a particularly active or malicious evil. In the main, he reacts, usually very violently, to perceived threats to the few things he cares about. Disregarding the scene in the sept that never happened, he's been clawing his way back up the alignment ladder slowly but surely since traveling with Brienne. He hasn't yet gotten north of Neutral, but he's closing in on it.
Arya was Chaotic Good at the outset, but has rapidly descended to Chaotic Neutral, and could well verge into Evil territory soon--the addition of Beric Dondarion and Thoros of Myr to her list shows that murder is becoming her idea of a default response to any given wrong. If she hooks up with the Faceless Assassins, she'll probably settle into a Lawful Evil alignment as they would presumably provide rules and structure to her (admittedly understandable) homicidal urges; otherwise, driven purely by vengeance, she could well become Chaotic Evil.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a kings guard he should have protected the children and the queen.
I don't know if he had the chance. He was guarding the king, the king told him to tell the pyromancer to torch the city, so he killed the pyromancer then killed the king. He barely had time to sit down on the throne when eddard stark rode in.
Killing the Mad King was a most likely a good act, he did it to save everyones lives (his included), it just wasn't a technically a lawful one. I don't think Jamie had any clue what his father was ordering done to Elia and the children, everything was happening really quickly at that point. And why would Tywin, a man who keeps everything close to the vest, even share that plan with his 17 year old Kingsguard son? He wouldn't. The only truly evil act we've seen him commit in the entire series was pushing Bran off the tower. And he has been climbing back towards good ever since. As he currently stands, I would place him at TN with good tendencies.
Plus the Mad King intentionally kept him close, as he didn't completely trust Jaime and wanted him as collateral against Tywin Lannister.
Jaimie can't teleport and be everywhere at once. Even if he was able to get over, odds are he would have been cut down before he could get to them, what with fog of war and The Mountain involved.
Killing the king isn't indicative of any alignment in particular. It could be anything from chaotic evils "Erm.. you want to burn down the city? But that's where I keep my stuff... and me!" to a lawful good paladins "Dammit... gotta pick good over law again"
I'm glad nobody has tried to argue Brienne as anything other than LG.
If GoT had PF rules and magic, she would be 100% Paladin.
She'd be kicked out for calling her superiors out on what they were doing wrong!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
She'd be kicked out for calling her superiors out on what they were doing wrong!I'm glad nobody has tried to argue Brienne as anything other than LG.
If GoT had PF rules and magic, she would be 100% Paladin.
If somebody brought her actions and scenarios to this forum, that's what some members of this community would recommend.
Most people have a good handle on things I might quibble here and there I think there are also alignment shifts in the book. People changing subtly or overtly throughout.
I would definitely that Ned was not stupid. He made decisions that had consequences but they were risks and I think he knew it. But he risked it because of his goodness not his lawfulness. After all the horrific death that he imagined would befall Cersi and her children would likely would have been lawful or made so after the fact.