To explain more about the philosophy, one of the important parts of the scorekeeping is that it can objectively follow definitions, without requiring judgment calls on the part of some scorekeeper (which can be subjective). In this case, I agree with both of you that Stannis probably "deserves" some credit - without his actions, Mance wouldn't have been put in a position to be killed. But "put in a position to be killed" is a little murky to make a rule for - how do you draw the line? Is it really Melisandre that puts him in that position because she starts the fire burning?
Given that, I think it's better to stick to the scoring definitions, because there's no subjectivity to them. And sometimes it results in a "deserving" character losing points, but that's fantasy sometimes - just like a football RB who hauls his team to the goal line, only for the backup to sub in and score the 1yd touchdown.-nyan
moonbaseu92 and coconnor723 like this
I agree with Nyan. Riddle me this: If someone (King A) commands his executioner (Brute) to kill the shopgirl (Lass), and Lass flees to Other Country where she is run over by a cart and dies, does King A get the point? Everyone's actions contribute. The point is, Mance was killed by Jon Snow. Jon Snow was NOT commanded to kill him by Stannis. Therefore, it's not a commanded kill.-alicehanners
That's different because Mance didn't escape from the fire and run away while Jon shot at him to keep him from escaping. He was in the process of dying. Even if Jon hadn't intervened, he still would've been dead. I know Stannis won't get points for that, and I don't care, I'm just saying that I disagree with your example.-kas113
moonbaseu92 likes this