A Game of Thrones **BOOKS OFF LIMITS** v2

[pseudoreality]

Originally Posted by Azure

So am I understanding this correctly? Ned Stark knew that Roberts Rebellion was based on a lie?

I think the Mad King burning Ned's father and brother alive was when the rebellion really kicked off.

[ernie]

The worst kept secret (Jon's heritage) finally gets confirmed and the issues it creates are many and fun to think about. When Dany and Jon find out they are aunt and nephew how do they immediately react? And after the immediate reaction does it matter to them? How threatened is Dany that Jon is the rightful heir to the throne? Does Jon even want to be the heir or is he much more inclined to share ruling with Dany? Does he just say "thanks but no thanks"?

And several other questions....

Is Cersei really pregnant? If she is does the child make it through to childbirth? Her prophecy said three children and it seems disingenuous to say "well she did have three children and here's a 4th!" What did she say to Tyrion? And does she doublecross him leading to him killing her? or is Jaime the younger brother that completes the prophecy?

When will Bran do something useful? His arc has been 7 seasons long so it darn well better amount to something huge.

What further role does Sansa have to play? She seems destined to be warden of the north if she lives. I feel her arc has been basically completed.

What of the burgeoning bromance between the Hound and Tolmund?

Who would have thought Brienne would have her choice of potential suitors! I sort of assume Brienne does not see a post-war world. I suspect she dies protecting Arya and/or Sansa at some point.

Despite some of the issues I found it to be a heck of a season that definitely left me wanting more.

I'm not sure I really care who lives or dies at this point now that Littlefinger got his comeuppance. Well beyond Cersei and the walkers I guess. After that who lives and who dies just needs to serve the story. No one is free of sin which is how GRRM wanted it.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by getbak

Yes, but not until it was over and Robert was sitting on the Iron Throne.

It also didn't matter if the initial abduction was a lie, as by that point the Mad King had already basically pissed off all the major houses:

1. Jaime was named to the King's Guard, potentially forcing Tywin Lannister to name Tyrion (who he hated) as his successor.

2. The Mad King executed the warden of the North, Rickard Stark, and his son.

3. The Mad King then demanded that Jon Arryn hand over Eddard Stark. Arryn couldn't do that, as he'd sworn an oath to protect Eddard. This more or less forced Arryn's hand into rebellion.


But yes, Robert's Rebellion was based on lies, or at the very least a misunderstanding. The Mad King's actions made a war inevitable though. It seems as though the intention of some of the Starks was initially to talk things out, and I'm sure if they'd found out that the truth, and that Lyanna and her children were actually now heirs to the throne they would have been fine with it. The Mad King, however, just started executed all of the Starks for no apparent reason.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by ernie

And several other questions....

Is Cersei really pregnant? If she is does the child make it through to childbirth? Her prophecy said three children and it seems disingenuous to say "well she did have three children and here's a 4th!"

It would technically be her 5th.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by pseudoreality

I think the Mad King burning Ned's father and brother alive was when the rebellion really kicked off.

Likely part of it. The believed abduction of Lyanna happened first. Brandon Stark went to demand Rhaegar be put to death and Lyanna returned. He was arrested for treason and Rickard was commanded to come to KL. They were both then executed by the mad king. It may have been the gasoline added to the fire but the fire started with the abduction. Which now the whole world knows wasn't really an abduction (and the mad king being the mad king).

After the rebellion, Ned goes to free his sister and learns the truth that this was no abduction and rape. The deaths of his dad, brother and countless others were based on, maybe not a lie, but misinformation. Now we can argue it was bound to happen with the mad king being what he was but in Ned's mind the rebellion and everything they fought for was a lie. Ned basically never returns to KL until literally being begged by Robert for this reason (IMO).

[ernie]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

It would technically be her 5th.

Forgot about that...well then toss that thought away.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by blankall

It also didn't matter if the initial abduction was a lie, as by that point the Mad King had already basically pissed off all the major houses:

1. Jaime was named to the King's Guard, potentially forcing Tywin Lannister to name Tyrion (who he hated) as his successor.

2. The Mad King executed the warden of the North, Rickard Stark, and his son.

3. The Mad King then demanded that Jon Arryn hand over Eddard Stark. Arryn couldn't do that, as he'd sworn an oath to protect Eddard. This more or less forced Arryn's hand into rebellion.

The Mad King demanded that Jon Arryn hand over Eddard Stark and Robert Baratheon.

He also executed Brandon Stark, who was betrothed to Catelyn Tully at the time.

He pretty much went out of his way to make as many strong enemies as possible as quickly as possible.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

The Mad King demanded that Jon Arryn hand over Eddard Stark and Robert Baratheon.

He also executed Brandon Stark, who was betrothed to Catelyn Tully at the time.

He pretty much went out of his way to make as many strong enemies as possible as quickly as possible.

I agree.

Anyone who knew the truth about Lyanna obviously hid the fact, as getting rid of the Mad King was a shared goal.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by blankall

I agree.

Anyone who knew the truth about Lyanna obviously hid the fact, as getting rid of the Mad King was a shared goal.

No doubt, but they rallied behind Robert and Ned whose primary reason very much seems to be the abduction. Without the abduction they likely chose someone but I have my doubts it the Barantheon and Stark banners.

[Oling_Roachinen]

They would have chose Rhaegar. It's in the lore that the Tourney at Harrenhal was pretty much accepted as a way to gather all the great houses together in secret away from the Mad King. But the Mad King, who hadn't left the Red Keep for years, got wind of the plot (from Varys) and attended, ruining Rhaegar's plot.

http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/...y_at_Harrenhal

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

^ If war against annihilation of a people isn't a battle of good vs evil, then I am not sure what it is?
Of course there is no happy ever after coming. I don't think anyone is naive enough to suggest harmony for the seven kingdoms is the end game.

I actually think we'll likely learn more about the walkers that will make them more complex, but even as they have been shown so far I still don't see the battle as good vs. evil. The living in GRRM's world are clearly not just good. There are complicated people full of conflict and, although there are heroes standing out, it's too simple to say that the living just represent 'good'. That would be a pretty strange description of GoT characters.

Also, the NK and the WWs so far are emotionless and don't have any clear human motivation that could be considered 'evil'. Them coming is equivalent to the changing of seasons or the arrival of nighttime. That's not evil, even if it's frightening.

At this point, the simplest characterisation of a big GoT theme that stands out in my mind is death vs. good & evil. Everyone faces death, and the Great War is the fight everyone has just to stay alive, but life is also nasty. Life is full of brutal violence, greed, selfishness, ambition etc. There is no happily ever after ending, because people are not good. The choice to live is universal, but other than that we're a nasty mess and a #### show. Evil is a part of the alternative to death.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

I actually think we'll likely learn more about the walkers that will make them more complex, but even as they have been shown so far I still don't see the battle as good vs. evil. The living in GRRM's world are clearly not just good. There are complicated people full of conflict and, although there are heroes standing out, it's too simple to say that the living just represent 'good'. That would be a pretty strange description of GoT characters.

Also, the NK and the WWs so far are emotionless and don't have any clear human motivation that could be considered 'evil'. Them coming is equivalent to the changing of seasons or the arrival of nighttime. That's not evil, even if it's frightening.

At this point, the simplest characterisation of a big GoT theme that stands out in my mind is death vs. good & evil. Everyone faces death, and the Great War is the fight everyone has just to stay alive, but life is also nasty. Life is full of brutal violence, greed, selfishness, ambition etc. There is no happily ever after ending, because people are not good. The choice to live is universal, but other than that we're a nasty mess and a #### show. Evil is a part of the alternative to death.

IMO GRRM has a Tolkenish theme to it, where men are inherently destructive. The humans on Westeros have eliminated all of the pre-existing races and cool creatures (children of the forest, giants, dragons, etc...) and replaced them with a series of kingdoms in perpetual conflict. The Children of the Forest that we saw were definitely now in opposition to the WW too. However, I still think there's more to the NK's motivations. I'm also curious to find out what caused the rift between the NK and the Children of the Forest.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by blankall

IMO GRRM has a Tolkenish theme to it, where men are inherently destructive. The humans on Westeros have eliminated all of the pre-existing races and cool creatures (children of the forest, giants, dragons, etc...) and replaced them with a series of kingdoms in perpetual conflict. The Children of the Forest that we saw were definitely now in opposition to the WW too. However, I still think there's more to the NK's motivations. I'm also curious to find out what caused the rift between the NK and the Children of the Forest.

I'm curious why you think the night king and the children of the forest were ever friends in the first place. I'm not aware of any evidence in the box or the TV shows to suggest that was the case. The previous episode where we saw the creation of the white walkers by the children of the forest seem to indicate that they immediately regretted their mistake because the white walkers were immediately evil.

[Iggy_12]

Some of yall gotta listen to this (NSFW Swear words)

https://www.facebook.com/barstoolspo...5734228017502/

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I'm curious why you think the night king and the children of the forest were ever friends in the first place. I'm not aware of any evidence in the box or the TV shows to suggest that was the case. The previous episode where we saw the creation of the white walkers by the children of the forest seem to indicate that they immediately regretted their mistake because the white walkers were immediately evil.

We don't know anything about whether the Children immediately regretted anything. We know that some Children of the Forest had sided with the 3 eyed raven and were fighting against the WW, but don't know how that came to be or how immediate that was. At some point some men and some Children united to defeat the WW.

Basically, there's a lot we don't know. There could have been multiple factions of Children. We don't know how much time passed between the WW creation and the conflict with them, etc..

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by blankall

We don't know anything about whether the Children immediately regretted anything. We know that some Children of the Forest had sided with the 3 eyed raven and were fighting against the WW, but don't know how that came to be or how immediate that was. At some point some men and some Children united to defeat the WW.

Basically, there's a lot we don't know. There could have been multiple factions of Children. We don't know how much time passed between the WW creation and the conflict with them, etc..

Yeah I know that's why I'm asking you why would you assume that something caused a rift between the Children and the WW. There's no reason to suspect there ever wasn't a rift.

From what we saw on the show it sure looked like the Children immediately regretted turning that man into a WW.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Iggy_12

Some of yall gotta listen to this (NSFW Swear words)

https://www.facebook.com/barstoolspo...5734228017502/

Pfft. Still didn't describe the capacity of a Lannister wagon, the exchange rate of Highgarden coins on the Essos market or the prime rate charged by the Iron bank. So many plot holes.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Yeah I know that's why I'm asking you why would you assume that something caused a rift between the Children and the WW. There's no reason to suspect there ever wasn't a rift.

From what we saw on the show it sure looked like the Children immediately regretted turning that man into a WW.

I'm curious what they showed that made it look like an immediate regret?

[burn_this_city]

They fought with the first men against the walkers.

[Finger Cookin]

GoT on twitter just shared this picture...why would this be bonus content on social media? Why wouldn't we see or hear Sansa receive this scroll in the actual episode?