The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

A Thread of a Series of a Song of Ice & Fire & Spoilers & Deviations

BlendtecBlendtec Registered User regular
If you're looking for the show thread, you're in the wrong kingdom. It's here though. Anything beyond this could be spoiler territory.

The show is going to deviate more and more from the books, both in terms of completely different content, and content the books haven't gotten to yet. Please use spoiler tags where appropriate. This includes leaks from new seasons being filmed, which will almost certainly include content new to us.

Once upon a time a boy in New Jersey had some pet turtles. Unfortunately for the boy, the turtles never lived very long, so in his imagination they lived and died in a land of medieval court intrigue and war. Years later that boy would grow up, grow a beard, and write some books.

NeftwXA.jpg

Today, his turtles live on die in the lands of Westeros and Essos in the hugely popular A Song of Ice and Fire. The series, originally planned for 7 books, has spawned 5 novels (write faster dammit!), several short stories and novellas, cookbooks, atlases, some other stuff I'm forgetting, and some TV show that no one really watches. Do not go posting spoilers, something you think is a clever hint or foreshadowing in the show thread. Book is a 4 letter word over there, so be careful about which thread you're posting in.

Taken from the last thread, thanks @Yar and @Quid.
#1 rule is no crying about something being spoiled, assuming it's already published material. If you haven't read all the books AND seen every aired show, then you are forbidden from accusing someone else of spoiling something for you. If you're posting an interview with GRRM where he talks about stuff that will happen in Book 6, yeah, that is the very epitome of a spoiler and must be tagged.

#2 rule, less important than #1, is to use your own best judgment and put tags around some things, like maybe details of TRW, or R+L=J theories, or major stuff from Book 5. Definitely anything about a show that hasn't aired (besides what we know from the books), or confirmed plot facts in books not yet published. Someone could very well click this thread by accident instead of the TV one, and they sure as hell don't want to see this in non-tagged form:

(major spoilers from books 3 - 5 as an example)
Hey, remember when Robb and Catelyn were killed by the Freys, and Sansa married Tyrion, but then Catelyn came back as an evil zombie and Joff chokes to death and Tyrion murders his father, and Jamie sort of becomes a good guy? That was awesome.

#3 rule is to try to do what I did above and preface your spoiler tags with a very brief description of what kind of spoiler it is and about when it occurs in the series.

Like so. Seriously, if you don't want spoilers, don't read this thread. Stop right now cause below this sentence? Thar be spoilers.

The Major Players

Some pretty major spoilers here.
House Targaryen - 300 years ago the last survivors of the Doom of Valyria decided their volcanic island was boring and conquered Westeros with some dragons and incest. They ruled with varying success until one king was a little too crazy for his own good and was cast down in a rebellion led by the Starks and Baratheons. Dany is the last confirmed Targaryen, her story has yet to take her to Westeros. As of the end of book 5 someone at least claiming to be Aegon Targaryen has landed in Westeros, aiming to reclaim the throne. There's probably some other secret Targaryens or Blackfyres (an offshot), cause why not.

House Baratheon - Rulers of the Stormlands, Robert Baratheon married Cersei Lannister and took the throne following his rebellion. Now Robert and his youngest brother Renly are dead, and Robert's children aren't actually his. Stannis "the Mannis" Baratheon continues to wage a civil war for his claim to the throne in the name of R'hllor, a god from Essos. Stannis is aided by Davos Seaworth, a former pirate turned advisor, and Melisandre, a powerful priestess of R'hllor, who believes Stannis to be Azor Ahai reborn. After a failed attack on King's Landing, Stannis refocuses his efforts on winning the hearts and minds of Westeros, starting in the North.

House Stark - Everything bad happens to the Starks, lords of the North. You start reading the books and you're thinking "here's some protagonists I can really get behind!", then a bunch of them are dead and the rest are in hiding. The kidnapping and killing of some Starks led to Robert's Rebellion. Now the house is considered extinct, all its members either dead, assumed dead, unable to claim their birthright, or turning into trees. The Stark children, save Sansa, all have pet direwolves, and most of them have exhibited at least some magical powers in the form of warging. The Starks are tied via marriage to the also extinct House Tully of the Riverlands. The torture happy House Bolton has replaced the Starks as the Wardens of the North, but the North Remembers and enjoys pie.

House Lannister - These guys have their own theme song, and they really like hearing it. The Lannisters are masters of using their power and wealth to further themselves, usually at high cost to others. Tommen Lannister Baratheon is currently the King of Westeros, born of an incestuous relationship between Cersei and Jaime Lannister. Tyrion Lannister, arguably the most well known character of the series, is currently in exile in Essos for murdering his father Tywin. While most of the series chronicles their rise to power, by the end of book 5 the surviving members barely hold a rapidly crumbling kingdom. Tommen's cat is the Pounce That Was Promised.

House Greyjoy - Vikings. That's pretty much it, they raid and pillage and propel other plot elements. No godless man may sit on the Seastone Chair, except Euron, who may or may not be Daario and/or Benjen and/or a secret Targaryen. Victarion has some crazy magic sizzling bacon hand thing going on. Reek, Reek it rhymes with leek/meek/sneak/weak.

House Tyrell - Ruling house of the kingdom's breadbasket, the Tyrells want nothing more than to take the throne. Margaery Tyrell is the current queen of Westeros, and her family has shouldered much of the monumental task of rebuilding the realm following a massive civil war. They are famously loyal only to themselves and could easily change sides again as it suites them.

House Martell - Rulers of the desert of Dorne, House Martell has the most ties to House Targaryen. Throughout most of the series they are simply mentioned, but through political maneuvering and long term scheming they are quickly forcing their way into main events. House Martell is headed by Doran, seeking revenge for the deaths of his sister Ellia during Robert's Rebellion, and his brother Oberyn, both at the hands of the Lannisters. Doran's daughter Arianne, and Oberyn's daughters the Sand Snakes are the other major players. Darkstar isn't a Martell, but he is of the night.

House Arryn / Baelish - Jon Arryn fostered Robert and Ned as children, and he would be the driving force behind Robert's Rebellion. Later he served as Robert's Hand, and his death at the hands of his wife Lysa and the former Master of Coins, Littlefinger, launches the events of the books. Littlefinger is currently in control of the Vale following his own murder of Lysa. Sansa Stark is in hiding with Littlefinger, who plans to wed her to Harry "the Heir" of the Vale, the only region other than Dorne untouched by the War of the 5 Kings. Littlefinger is also Lord of the Riverlands, and there is no way his meteoric rise to power will come back to bite him.

Night's Watch - Defenders of Westeros from the mysterious and evil Others / White Walkers, the Black Brothers guard a massive ice wall far in the North. Forbidden from engaging in the affairs of the rest of the kingdom, the Watch is largely ignored by the rest of the world as most consider the Others nothing more than myth. Under the leadership of Jon Snow the Watch ended its 8000 year old conflict with the Wildings, free people north of the Wall. A popular theory sees Jon as the child of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark, the kidnapping/coupling that led to Robert's Rebellion. He's also probably the Prince That Was Promised and/or Azor Ahai and/or one of the heads of the dragon, but prophecies are words and words are wind and Jon ends the last book sporting some new knives in his back.

Essos - The other continent. The western portion of which is ruled by 9 powerful and always warring city states. The middle portion is controlled by the powerful Dothraki, who are basically the Mongols. There's a bunch of stuff to the far east that only gets brief mentions, and even more that is only on some maps in some sources. Dany Targaryen, Tyrion Lannister and Victarion Greyjoy are all currently in the southern Slaver's Bay, hopefully about to do something.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbEhByk4Icg

Some actual characters.

Links

A Wiki of Ice and Fire.

Speculative Map. This is out of date given there's an actual map book, but it's still a great reference.

Game of Thrones (TV Show) Wiki.

There is a new book (not Winds unfortunately) OUT! It's an encyclopedia, A World of Ice and Fire. It's got a lot of really well done illustrations, but the writing is a bit suspect in some sections. It's also available as an iStuff and Android app. The apps are free but have in-app purchases to unlock more content.

«13456748

Posts

  • BlendtecBlendtec Registered User regular
    edited May 2015
    There was a thread before this too!
    Chanus wrote: »
    They were poisoned, but we don't know by who.

    by whom

    /stannis

    u7XiJTn.gif

    Any excuse to keep using this gif. Thanks @simonwolf for the much improved version.

    Blendtec on
  • BlendtecBlendtec Registered User regular
    edited May 2015
    I didn't want to clutter the OP anymore, so here's this.

    Those who have been lost to us…
    nNOKhE1.png

    A guy who pooped.
    siJbQbW.jpg

    Batman Darkstar Cringe
    9iEboxg.jpg

    The North Remembers, even if D&D don't.
    fPSHsCL.jpg

    Zombie
    wTX1QNo.png

    One fish
    xVLD2DA.jpg

    Two fish, red fish, Blackfish.
    eAndbfz.jpg

    Ser Bacon Hand the Impractical
    xFThJ1p.jpg

    Daario Benjen Stark
    k7XB19d.png

    Daario Again
    Se9oHE9.jpg

    The Pounce That Was Promised
    F0ZXTdG.jpg

    Blendtec on
  • So It GoesSo It Goes We keep moving...Registered User regular
    KITTY

  • BobbleBobble Registered User regular
    Pour one out for Wyman Manderly.
    My son Wendel came to the the Twins a guest. He ate Lord Walder's bread and salt, and hung his sword upon the wall to feast with friends. And they murdered him. Murdered, I say, and may the Freys choke upon their fables. I drink with Jared, jape with Symond, promise Rhaegar the hand of my own beloved granddaughter ... but never think that means I have forgotten. The north remembers, Lord Davos. The north remembers, and the mummer’s farce is almost done. My son is home

  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    So sad we don't get Manderly.

    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • FrozenzenFrozenzen Registered User regular
    Yeah, Manderly was such a great part of the books.

    Which probably set us up for dissapointment, but hey. That's par for the course!

  • SniperGuySniperGuy SniperGuyGaming Registered User regular
    I went and refreshed my memory on Manderly and yeah, I really don't see how they could work the meat pie thing in at this point.

  • Steel AngelSteel Angel Registered User regular
    From the last thread:
    shryke wrote: »
    I don't know, if I had to pin down why the scene is so dumb to alot of people, it's because it takes two main character's arcs, then has the female character get raped to progress the male character's storyline. Theon and Sansa's stories collide and it's treated as an important moment for Theon and Sansa is just there as a sexually-violated prop for his character arc.

    It's literally fridging.

    And seemingly for little reason.

    We don't know that for sure that it was just for the male characters. If it does, it's stupid but just because it involves Theon and Ramsay doesn't mean it won't be used to develop Sansa's character. It's quite feasible that the focus was on Theon's face for the sake of discretion and to make sure the scene was not titillating in any way and I still think that the cliche Theon gets angry and goes hulk smash isn't a given since we have Chekov's candle, the servants, Brienne, and Pod all waiting to come up still. They COULD royally mess things up of course, but it's too early for me to judge that.

    Big Dookie wrote: »
    I found that tilting it doesn't work very well, and once I started jerking it, I got much better results.

    Steam Profile
    3DS: 3454-0268-5595 Battle.net: SteelAngel#1772
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    From the last thread:
    shryke wrote: »
    I don't know, if I had to pin down why the scene is so dumb to alot of people, it's because it takes two main character's arcs, then has the female character get raped to progress the male character's storyline. Theon and Sansa's stories collide and it's treated as an important moment for Theon and Sansa is just there as a sexually-violated prop for his character arc.

    It's literally fridging.

    And seemingly for little reason.

    We don't know that for sure that it was just for the male characters. If it does, it's stupid but just because it involves Theon and Ramsay doesn't mean it won't be used to develop Sansa's character. It's quite feasible that the focus was on Theon's face for the sake of discretion and to make sure the scene was not titillating in any way and I still think that the cliche Theon gets angry and goes hulk smash isn't a given since we have Chekov's candle, the servants, Brienne, and Pod all waiting to come up still. They COULD royally mess things up of course, but it's too early for me to judge that.

    They've shown no compunction before about being too titillating. I think it's silly to pretend the way it was shot was anything but a deliberate choice on what to emphasize.

  • PsykomaPsykoma Registered User regular
    From what the show thread is discussion - how much of a threat do you think the Iron Islands are to any of the other great houses/regions?

    I feel that they don't match up to the West with its money, or the Reach with its people and money, but with their mobility they would be roughly similar threats as Dorne which is so sparse and unpopulous, the North which is so big, the Vale which is just rocky and seemingly low populations, and the Riverlands which are just unremarkable.

    That's not to say Dorne, The North, The Vale and the Iron Islands aren't formidable, it's just that their primary strength is in how defensible they are; which isn't generally a threatening capability.

  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    Dorne, The North, and The Vale are major players with real armies

    the iron islands are a collection of dreary fishers with a handful of raiders, a threat to castles without their lords and unprotected villages

    their house is long past its glory days

  • reVersereVerse Attack and Dethrone God Registered User regular
    Of course, that's gonna change when Euron steals himself a dragon.

  • PsykomaPsykoma Registered User regular
    I feel that the iron islands could support an army of at least some 15,000-20,000; the majority of whom are trained raiders, and their longships give them unprecedented mobility that none of the other houses could dream of matching.

  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    My read is the Iron Islands aren't a major land based threat. On the seas the only ones who could hope to stop them are the Reach though. They'd pillage the fuck out of anybody else if they decided to open warfare against them.

    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited May 2015
    The Iron Islands are a big threat in the way any raiders are. They come in, kill people and burn and steal stuff and then leave before you can react and it's really difficult to make them stop doing that.

    shryke on
  • JoiryJoiry Registered User regular
    Joiry wrote: »
    Still not sure what conclusion I'm coming to on this, but this article has me thinking.

    http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/all-hopefully-of-the-bad-arguments-about-rape-on-game-of-thrones-debunked/
    One way you can tell that people are starting from a conclusion and arguing backwards is when they bust out the everything-and-the-kitchen-sink strategy: Trying a bunch of different arguments in hopes that one “sticks” and justifies a conclusion you’ve already arrived at and are trying to rationalize. That strategy was out in spades with the critics of the Ramsay Bolton/Sansa Stark rape on Game of Thrones.

    Funny, that's the way I feel about the people defending the scene. Kettle, pot.

    Honestly, when it comes to a horrific scene like that, the burden is not on saying why its bad, the burden is on proving its truly necessary to the plot.

    Clearly opinions differ, but I've found the defense particularly thin, not even close to reaching the threshold.

    The bolded is literally impossible. Any scene is "unnecessary" in the sense that the same narrative goal could have been accomplished in some other fashion (or the story could have been taken in another direction obviating that specific narrative goal). It is fiction, after all; everything is made up.

    As for why I've listed multiple reasons for the scene, it's because I feel it serves multiple narrative purposes at the same time. If I'm going to describe my opinion on the scene, I kind of have to list them all.

    In addition, on both sides of the argument, several people (who may individually be consistent in their arguments) cumulatively present a plethora of arguments. In the minds of those on the other side of the argument (and I know I'm guilty of this, too), all the different people and their arguments tend to coalesce into an entity speaking with many (often contradictory) voices. In reality, of course, it is not one person voicing many (often contradictory) arguments; it is many people with their own individual (usually consistent) arguments.

    It's sometimes hard for all of us (me included) to keep this in mind.

    Point one, yeah, obviously nothing is necessary. But I think the point I was trying to make was obvious, if not:

    If you're going to have rape, you better have some good narrative reasons - the threshold should be high. I've seen/read rapes scenes that I've hated, but I've seen their purpose. This one had none that hadn't already existed. The burden should be on justification, not saying why its bad, and it should have some damn good reasons.

    I do feel you have a double standard. Even before that linked article, I believe it was you calling out the people saying it was not necessary for having too many reasons. Just like you having several that you feel build up to justification (even tho they were all already pre-covered by the story), the other side can too. And I don't really see any of them being contradictory.

  • Apothe0sisApothe0sis Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality? Registered User regular
    Joiry wrote: »
    Joiry wrote: »
    Still not sure what conclusion I'm coming to on this, but this article has me thinking.

    http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/all-hopefully-of-the-bad-arguments-about-rape-on-game-of-thrones-debunked/
    One way you can tell that people are starting from a conclusion and arguing backwards is when they bust out the everything-and-the-kitchen-sink strategy: Trying a bunch of different arguments in hopes that one “sticks” and justifies a conclusion you’ve already arrived at and are trying to rationalize. That strategy was out in spades with the critics of the Ramsay Bolton/Sansa Stark rape on Game of Thrones.

    Funny, that's the way I feel about the people defending the scene. Kettle, pot.

    Honestly, when it comes to a horrific scene like that, the burden is not on saying why its bad, the burden is on proving its truly necessary to the plot.

    Clearly opinions differ, but I've found the defense particularly thin, not even close to reaching the threshold.

    The bolded is literally impossible. Any scene is "unnecessary" in the sense that the same narrative goal could have been accomplished in some other fashion (or the story could have been taken in another direction obviating that specific narrative goal). It is fiction, after all; everything is made up.

    As for why I've listed multiple reasons for the scene, it's because I feel it serves multiple narrative purposes at the same time. If I'm going to describe my opinion on the scene, I kind of have to list them all.

    In addition, on both sides of the argument, several people (who may individually be consistent in their arguments) cumulatively present a plethora of arguments. In the minds of those on the other side of the argument (and I know I'm guilty of this, too), all the different people and their arguments tend to coalesce into an entity speaking with many (often contradictory) voices. In reality, of course, it is not one person voicing many (often contradictory) arguments; it is many people with their own individual (usually consistent) arguments.

    It's sometimes hard for all of us (me included) to keep this in mind.

    Point one, yeah, obviously nothing is necessary. But I think the point I was trying to make was obvious, if not:

    If you're going to have rape, you better have some good narrative reasons - the threshold should be high. I've seen/read rapes scenes that I've hated, but I've seen their purpose. This one had none that hadn't already existed. The burden should be on justification, not saying why its bad, and it should have some damn good reasons.

    I do feel you have a double standard. Even before that linked article, I believe it was you calling out the people saying it was not necessary for having too many reasons. Just like you having several that you feel build up to justification (even tho they were all already pre-covered by the story), the other side can too. And I don't really see any of them being contradictory.

    The bolded, and variations thereof, crops up a lot. It doesn't strike me as self evident despite it often being asserted.

    "If you're going to have a murder, you better have some good narrative reasons" doesn't strike me as a particularly plausible objection. Or perhaps we could say of Oberon's death, if you're going to have someone extraordinarily brutally killed, in terror, pain and gruesome detail you better have a reason...

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Well, if Dorne were being executed well that would be a reason.

    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • Apothe0sisApothe0sis Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality? Registered User regular
    Well, if Dorne were being executed well that would be a reason.

    A) so, if Winterfell resolves well, it's fine and all of this is premature.

    B) the Dorne plot could have been motivated by a much less gruesome death

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    As I've mentioned, I don't trust these showrunners to handle the aftermath of rape well. Or really much of anything that isn't largely defined by the books. at this point.

    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • Apothe0sisApothe0sis Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality? Registered User regular
    That has nothing to do with the scene as a rape scene though, and everything to do with them being bumbling nincompoops

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Specifically rape though, considering Jaime/Cersei last year where they clearly depicted a rape and half of them didn't notice.

    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • Apothe0sisApothe0sis Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality? Registered User regular
    Psykoma wrote: »
    I feel that the iron islands could support an army of at least some 15,000-20,000; the majority of whom are trained raiders, and their longships give them unprecedented mobility that none of the other houses could dream of matching.
    That is a huge army, compared to the size of the iron island and Renley's unprecedentedly massive army - which was some 60k from memory.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    He claimed ~100k.

    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • Apothe0sisApothe0sis Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality? Registered User regular
    He claimed ~100k.

    I stand corrected. But that also draws from a much larger and more populous and prosperous area than the Iron Islands, is my point.

    The Iron Isles fielding a 20k man army seems unlikely

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Considering Robb's host was about that, I think you're about right. Victarion's fleet was like 50 longships and that was I think half their force?

    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • Apothe0sisApothe0sis Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality? Registered User regular
    edited May 2015
    Specifically rape though, considering Jaime/Cersei last year where they clearly depicted a rape and half of them didn't notice.

    I don't know what your point is here, as they butchered the Dorne plot, but no one is complaining that the horror of Oberon's death was unjustified as a consequence.

    If your complaint is that they have shown themselves as being unable to properly handle serious issues, then this remains a problem with them and their narrative capabilities not with rape scenes qua rape scenes.

    Edit: third option, my initial objection doesn't apply to you because you have a separate set of ideas and arguments.

    Apothe0sis on
  • simonwolfsimonwolf i can feel a difference today, a differenceRegistered User regular
    I'm not sure how offended I should be that the OP is using some cheap knock-off of the Stannis haters gif, probably stitched together in terrible working conditions by Laotian children

  • McFodderMcFodder Registered User regular
    Apothe0sis wrote: »
    The Iron Isles fielding a 20k man army seems unlikely

    But a 15k men 5k women, or even 12/8k, is probably more likely. Renley I can see only taking men in their prime, the Iron Islands would throw everything.

    Switch Friend Code: SW-3944-9431-0318
    PSN / Xbox / NNID: Fodder185
  • [Expletive deleted][Expletive deleted] The mediocre doctor NorwayRegistered User regular
    Joiry wrote: »
    Joiry wrote: »
    Still not sure what conclusion I'm coming to on this, but this article has me thinking.

    http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/all-hopefully-of-the-bad-arguments-about-rape-on-game-of-thrones-debunked/
    One way you can tell that people are starting from a conclusion and arguing backwards is when they bust out the everything-and-the-kitchen-sink strategy: Trying a bunch of different arguments in hopes that one “sticks” and justifies a conclusion you’ve already arrived at and are trying to rationalize. That strategy was out in spades with the critics of the Ramsay Bolton/Sansa Stark rape on Game of Thrones.

    Funny, that's the way I feel about the people defending the scene. Kettle, pot.

    Honestly, when it comes to a horrific scene like that, the burden is not on saying why its bad, the burden is on proving its truly necessary to the plot.

    Clearly opinions differ, but I've found the defense particularly thin, not even close to reaching the threshold.

    The bolded is literally impossible. Any scene is "unnecessary" in the sense that the same narrative goal could have been accomplished in some other fashion (or the story could have been taken in another direction obviating that specific narrative goal). It is fiction, after all; everything is made up.

    As for why I've listed multiple reasons for the scene, it's because I feel it serves multiple narrative purposes at the same time. If I'm going to describe my opinion on the scene, I kind of have to list them all.

    In addition, on both sides of the argument, several people (who may individually be consistent in their arguments) cumulatively present a plethora of arguments. In the minds of those on the other side of the argument (and I know I'm guilty of this, too), all the different people and their arguments tend to coalesce into an entity speaking with many (often contradictory) voices. In reality, of course, it is not one person voicing many (often contradictory) arguments; it is many people with their own individual (usually consistent) arguments.

    It's sometimes hard for all of us (me included) to keep this in mind.

    Point one, yeah, obviously nothing is necessary. But I think the point I was trying to make was obvious, if not:

    If you're going to have rape, you better have some good narrative reasons - the threshold should be high. I've seen/read rapes scenes that I've hated, but I've seen their purpose. This one had none that hadn't already existed. The burden should be on justification, not saying why its bad, and it should have some damn good reasons.

    I do feel you have a double standard. Even before that linked article, I believe it was you calling out the people saying it was not necessary for having too many reasons. Just like you having several that you feel build up to justification (even tho they were all already pre-covered by the story), the other side can too. And I don't really see any of them being contradictory.

    If I came across as doing that, that was certainly not my intention. I know (and knew) that different people had different objections; some of my questions were directed at finding out precisely what about the scene the different people objected to.

    Sic transit gloria mundi.
  • RhahRhah Registered User regular
    Jragghen wrote: »

    The Ramsay, Theon thing was great. Heh. Ramsay's voice even in normal speaking still gives me the willies.

  • RhahRhah Registered User regular
    Heh, even though I am on the side that it was a bit much and not needed, this is quite funny... posted on reddit or the internets or wherever it was originally made.
    Spoilered for too tall:
    WSCmkP7.jpg

  • SniperGuySniperGuy SniperGuyGaming Registered User regular
    Oh man, I saw the Tyrion bit seperate from the full video. Ramsay's thumbs up after that with everyone looking kinda freaked out is awesome.

  • FireflashFireflash Montreal, QCRegistered User regular
    edited May 2015
    Dany's Rastafarian Targaryen was great. I want a whole song!

    Fireflash on
    PSN: PatParadize
    Battle.net: Fireflash#1425
    Steam Friend code: 45386507
  • Inquisitor77Inquisitor77 2 x Penny Arcade Fight Club Champion A fixed point in space and timeRegistered User regular
    non-consenual*

  • BobbleBobble Registered User regular
    Lots of great stuff in that video. Hell, just seeing Rose Leslie again.

  • reVersereVerse Attack and Dethrone God Registered User regular
    Bobble wrote: »
    Lots of great stuff in that video. Hell, just seeing Rose Leslie again.

    If you like Rose Leslie so much, why dontcha marry her and go on a honeymoon.

  • BlendtecBlendtec Registered User regular
    simonwolf wrote: »
    I'm not sure how offended I should be that the OP is using some cheap knock-off of the Stannis haters gif, probably stitched together in terrible working conditions by Laotian children

    I've been using it 3 threads in a row now. I will gladly replace it if there's a better one though.

  • Element BrianElement Brian Peanut Butter Shill Registered User regular
    Ramsay in real life is surprisingly adorable

    Switch FC code:SW-2130-4285-0059

    Arch,
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_goGR39m2k
This discussion has been closed.