Posted by: Lord Xizer
« on: March 31, 2018, 01:07:04 PM »Depends on how you're defining Right there. Stannis was next in line after Robert, true, but Robert was a usurper who seized the Iron Throne from the Targaryen line that created it in the first place - prior to Aegon's conquest there was no single ruler of Westeros, simply seven independent kingdoms.
Personally, I think Stannis would've been a terrible king. Not because he was a bad person or incompetent, but because he was terrible with people - a king needs to maintain the loyalty of the lords and play them against each other, and Stannis never showed a talent for playing politics of that nature. He's respected, but neither loved nor feared, and come winter his inability to inspire or motivate the lords would've torn the kingdoms apart as they tried to survive the onslaught.
Of course, Dany's not all that great a queen either, nor Jon Snow a great king - but these two are younger and more malleable, more willing to acknowledge and learn from their mistakes, so the potential to grow into the roles is there. Stannis was too old and too stubborn to change his ways.
Simple, the Targaryan dynasty was created by Right of Conques. When Aegon conquered Westeros it established that as a Right recognized by the kingdoms. When Robert Baratheon killed Prince Rhaegar(effectively defeating the Targaryan dynasty at the Battle of the Trident and ensuring the collapse of the Mad King) and then took the Iron Throne the Targaryan dynasty was replaced by Right of Conquest with the Baratheon Dynasty-again widely accepted and then proven by the kingdoms as the new legitimate dynasty. Since Robert had no trueborn heirs the Throne by right of both birth, blood and succession passes by law to Stannis since the Baratheon Dynasty was not overthrown by conquest and the lannister bastards rule with Baratheon last names because it is still the acknowledged dynasty.
Stannis would I think be a good king-though an unpopular one- his reforms are based off merit earned, he would scour the court clean and appoint men of talent instead of sycophants. It is precisely this reason the schemes like Baelish and varys oppose him because he is not corruptible or acceptable to bribery and flattery. He's probably the best military commander in Westeros on land or sea and is just. He inspires no love but fierce loyalty in those who follow him, "the lords might have their doubts but the common man believed in their King-he was Robert's brother, victor of the famous battle off fair isle.-ADoD
Stannis would not be popular with the Lords but with support from the Iron Bank, a proven mind for both governing and warfare none would be able to mount effective challenge to his position were he to sit the Throne.
Finally your claim Stannis is too old to change is not based on what we've seen. He has the kingdom's longevity in mind sees the need to bend when it's called for and showed great versitility and the ability to adapt from the time Davos returned after Blackwater to his present time in the North-listening to Jon, distancing himself from the red woman, winning the northern clans and the iron bank.
