Part of me is depressed that, on the game of thrones website, in the family tree section
The name Ned gives as the mother of Jon is in airquotes, "Wylla".
I don't have any issues with the R+L theory (but I'm not really a supporter). It's just slightly annoying that, without any evidence presented in the show, they make it look and sound like the name given is a lie.
If the site changes the relationships / status (living / dead), then it'd be interesting for it to have changed once evidence is brought in.
not a supporter huh?
sheesh, its pretty much a given at this point.
I think a lot will be answered when Barristan is a POV character. When he said he had a bunch of stuff to tell Dany; if Jon Snow is her nephew, that would be the first thing to say. Plus he would have to know; half the kingsguard were at the Tower of Joy.
The thing is, Barristan probably doesn't know the whole story. He may know that a baby was coming (I still think R+L were married...otherwise who has the authority to make Jon a legitimate heir?)...but I don't think he can be SURE that the bastard Ned claimed was actually born in the Tower of Joy.
Half the Kingsguard were at the Tower of Joy.. but not Barristan, he was fighting in the war pretty much the whole time. He wouldn't know
But there is literally no way R+L=J isn't true, the evidence is overwhelming
Part of me is depressed that, on the game of thrones website, in the family tree section
The name Ned gives as the mother of Jon is in airquotes, "Wylla".
I don't have any issues with the R+L theory (but I'm not really a supporter). It's just slightly annoying that, without any evidence presented in the show, they make it look and sound like the name given is a lie.
If the site changes the relationships / status (living / dead), then it'd be interesting for it to have changed once evidence is brought in.
not a supporter huh?
sheesh, its pretty much a given at this point.
I think a lot will be answered when Barristan is a POV character. When he said he had a bunch of stuff to tell Dany; if Jon Snow is her nephew, that would be the first thing to say. Plus he would have to know; half the kingsguard were at the Tower of Joy.
The thing is, Barristan probably doesn't know the whole story. He may know that a baby was coming (I still think R+L were married...otherwise who has the authority to make Jon a legitimate heir?)...but I don't think he can be SURE that the bastard Ned claimed was actually born in the Tower of Joy.
Half the Kingsguard were at the Tower of Joy.. but not Barristan, he was fighting in the war pretty much the whole time. He wouldn't know
But there is literally no way R+L=J isn't true, the evidence is overwhelming
As the head of the Kingsguard, wouldn't Barristan
have some idea of where the other 6 were and why? There's that log book...it'll be interesting if Jaime reads something interesting about that time.
Here's a fun one...what if R+L=someone else, and Ned felt the need to show up with a Bastard to help provide cover for hiding the real baby? Yeah, I know, lots of evidence against it...mostly the blue rose in a wall of ice.
Barristan was not the head of Kingsguard during Aerys. Gerold Hightower, the White Bull was. He died in the Tower of Joy.
Yeah. The only person who could legitimately validate Jon's parentage is Howland Reed, of the crannogmen. He fought alongside Ned at the Tower of Joy, and was the only person to survive it beside him. He's going to be the one to make the reveal, unless he mentioned it to others.
Didn't Ned support Robert because he was the eldest Baratheon and that family had the most Targaryen blood out of the major houses? I wonder if Ned would have supported Rhaegar and tried to end the rebellion if Jaime had acted sooner in taking out Aerys.
Ned didn't push for Viserys to take the throne as the next Targaryen in line, which is a fatal flaw in his Baratheon royal blood ties reasoning. I must be remembering it wrong.
Robert's 'royal' blood is tenuous at best, there's a lot more families with royal blood, the Daynes for one. I can't remember his name but Dondarion's squire even has the silver hair of a targaryen. I think Arthur Dayne and his brother (the squire's father? uncle?) both did as well.
Daynes aren't related to Targaryens in any way...they are an old Dornish family.
Anyway, any blood line claims from any family are kind of silly and obvious excuses. Velaryons are probably the closest since they are actually a Valyrian House themselves and intermarried with the Targaryens quite a lot.
Tangentially - I hope we get to see more of Darkstar Dayne, whose real first name escapes me, as the Dayne family seems like they could have been an interesting element had GRRM brought Dorne into the series a bit earlier. Though I suppose I can't remember if many of the Daynes still live at this point in Westeros' history.
Every Dayne ever mentioned seems to possess a certain quality of importance, they just all exist in the background.
Is anyone else expecting the Red Wedding to be a disappointment in the show compared to how it was presented in the novel? I mean, it was just SO well done in the books that I can't imagine any director pulling it off the way I see it in my head.
If they don't have a bard singing that creepy fucking song while they butcher the Stark bannermen and Walder Frey sits and watches, it won't even compare.
Is anyone else expecting the Red Wedding to be a disappointment in the show compared to how it was presented in the novel? I mean, it was just SO well done in the books that I can't imagine any director pulling it off the way I see it in my head.
If they don't have a bard singing that creepy fucking song while they butcher the Stark bannermen and Walder Frey sits and watches, it won't even compare.
I don't see it even being done without being obvious.
Fizban140 on
0
Options
HachfaceNot the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking ofDammit, Shepard!Registered Userregular
Is anyone else expecting the Red Wedding to be a disappointment in the show compared to how it was presented in the novel? I mean, it was just SO well done in the books that I can't imagine any director pulling it off the way I see it in my head.
If they don't have a bard singing that creepy fucking song while they butcher the Stark bannermen and Walder Frey sits and watches, it won't even compare.
Stannis has proved many times over by now that he would be an awful king
I'm not really certain about that.
He's shown a self-awareness about his own faults in the past and keeps people around who would call him on it. He might just be smart enough to back the fuck off aside from giving general direction. I don't think he, if he inherited under normal circumstances, would be a really terrible king. He sure as fuck would stop this whole "Up to our eyeballs in debt" thing that has been going on.
In the current situation he would likely have to execute half the fucking realm though. He doesn't really have a path to a peace even if he could triumph militarily.
Yeah, Stannis' problem has always been rigidity and an adherence to the rules. That doesn't make him a bad King. And certainly wouldn't under normal circumstances.
Rigidity would be the worst quality to have in a place like Westeros, where nobles regularly field their own armies and are allowed huge amounts of autonomy. He'd piss off way too many people to be an effective ruler.
Javen on
0
Options
HachfaceNot the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking ofDammit, Shepard!Registered Userregular
edited June 2011
No king could be effective without skill in Westerosi realpolitik. Ned wouldn't have lasted long.
No king could be effective without skill in Westerosi realpolitik. Ned wouldn't have lasted long.
.......you say this after Robert lasted 16+ years.
Point the first: Robert was not an effective king.
Point the second: Robert survived as long as he did because he really did not give a shit about what was happening to the realm. Ned would actually try to run the country responsibly and piss off powerful people in the process.
Robert survived 16 years because he let everyone do whatever they wanted, and on the few occasions where he didn't want what they wanted, he used his inspirational abilities as a war leader and beat the living shit out of them.
No king could be effective without skill in Westerosi realpolitik. Ned wouldn't have lasted long.
.......you say this after Robert lasted 16+ years.
Point the first: Robert was not an effective king.
Point the second: Robert survived as long as he did because he really did not give a shit about what was happening to the realm. Ned would actually try to run the country responsibly and piss off powerful people in the process.
Eh.
This is a question of timing but if Ned had been King in place of Robert he would have had no problems what so ever from these "powerful" people. Despite how much people like to claim he sucks at politics he would have pretty unshakeable support from The North, The Riverlands, The Vale and the Reach.
Even if Dorne and Highgarden somehow managed to work together and join the Lannisters they'd still be pretty fucked and Highgarden has zero reason to do it in the first place and Dorne is unlikely to try and avenge Elia by working with her murderer.
That's assuming he somehow unnecessarily provokes the Lannisters. He probably could have won Tywin's undying support by stripping Jamie of the white. Ned would like to do it given the whole Aerys thing and Tywin would (secretly) be all for it if it gave him his heir back.
Robert survived 16 years because he let everyone do whatever they wanted, and on the few occasions where he didn't want what they wanted, he used his inspirational abilities as a war leader and beat the living shit out of them.
Also, Jon Arryn was a good hand of the king, ran things well while Robert went out whoring and fighting and running up enormous debts.
For better or worse, Westeros needs to get invaded pretty damn quick for everyone's sake. Nobody currently on the continent is prepared for what's coming.
I'm really worried about how the show is going to show the battles. I mean they changed the story so that they could avoid showing the battle of the green fork, and that would have been relatively easy. How the heck are they going to do the battle of the blackwater or the stuff that goes on in slaver's bay if they shy away from that little thing?
I'm really worried about how the show is going to show the battles. I mean they changed the story so that they could avoid showing the battle of the green fork, and that would have been relatively easy. How the heck are they going to do the battle of the blackwater or the stuff that goes on in slaver's bay if they shy away from that little thing?
spoilering for further book details...
I'm not so much worried about Slavers Bay, because even the books really didn't show much of the actual battles...more little bits and pieces, then Dany sitting on some new throne. But the Blackwater worries me greatly. That MUST be a full-on epic battle, with great SFX and whatnot. I can give them a pass w/ the Green Fork and Whispering Wood because there was still just so much to do and say and characters to build upon and tension to build and all that...spending time on a battle, in the context of that episode, wasn't absolutely necessary. But by the time we get to the Blackwater it's all about full-on war.
I'm really worried about how the show is going to show the battles. I mean they changed the story so that they could avoid showing the battle of the green fork, and that would have been relatively easy. How the heck are they going to do the battle of the blackwater or the stuff that goes on in slaver's bay if they shy away from that little thing?
My HOPE is that they're saving money skipping out on the puny early battles so they can show us at least SOME of the major battles. I would be totally OK if they did it Rome style and just showed relevant characters + montage of fighting + aftermath.
hailthefish on
0
Options
HachfaceNot the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking ofDammit, Shepard!Registered Userregular
I'm really worried about how the show is going to show the battles. I mean they changed the story so that they could avoid showing the battle of the green fork, and that would have been relatively easy. How the heck are they going to do the battle of the blackwater or the stuff that goes on in slaver's bay if they shy away from that little thing?
spoilering for further book details...
I'm not so much worried about Slavers Bay, because even the books really didn't show much of the actual battles...more little bits and pieces, then Dany sitting on some new throne. But the Blackwater worries me greatly. That MUST be a full-on epic battle, with great SFX and whatnot. I can give them a pass w/ the Green Fork and Whispering Wood because there was still just so much to do and say and characters to build upon and tension to build and all that...spending time on a battle, in the context of that episode, wasn't absolutely necessary. But by the time we get to the Blackwater it's all about full-on war.
GRRM himself is going to write episode 8 of season 2, and he implied in an interview that there is a huge battle in that episode that is a big challenge to write. So we'll see!
Posts
But there is literally no way R+L=J isn't true, the evidence is overwhelming
They just addressed that with...
A fascinating thread I tell you.
twit feed
As the head of the Kingsguard, wouldn't Barristan
Here's a fun one...what if R+L=someone else, and Ned felt the need to show up with a Bastard to help provide cover for hiding the real baby? Yeah, I know, lots of evidence against it...mostly the blue rose in a wall of ice.
Robert's 'royal' blood is tenuous at best, there's a lot more families with royal blood, the Daynes for one. I can't remember his name but Dondarion's squire even has the silver hair of a targaryen. I think Arthur Dayne and his brother (the squire's father? uncle?) both did as well.
Anyway, any blood line claims from any family are kind of silly and obvious excuses. Velaryons are probably the closest since they are actually a Valyrian House themselves and intermarried with the Targaryens quite a lot.
Every Dayne ever mentioned seems to possess a certain quality of importance, they just all exist in the background.
Would Stannis make a good king?
No.
Cool argument bro.
Lots of facts and stuff.
If they don't have a bard singing that creepy fucking song while they butcher the Stark bannermen and Walder Frey sits and watches, it won't even compare.
I don't see it even being done without being obvious.
Special guest director:
Lars von Trier
I'm not really certain about that.
He's shown a self-awareness about his own faults in the past and keeps people around who would call him on it. He might just be smart enough to back the fuck off aside from giving general direction. I don't think he, if he inherited under normal circumstances, would be a really terrible king. He sure as fuck would stop this whole "Up to our eyeballs in debt" thing that has been going on.
In the current situation he would likely have to execute half the fucking realm though. He doesn't really have a path to a peace even if he could triumph militarily.
Edit: He also lacks the charisma to really lead people or make friends, and he doesn't have the military strength to triumph by himself.
Yea, well Ned wouldn't make a bad king. He handled Bolton for years, his issue going south was he had no clue how fucked things were down there.
Point 2 is half right, he's an effective war leader but a horrible fucking inspiring one. Three isn't really relevant to the question at hand.
.......you say this after Robert lasted 16+ years.
Point the first: Robert was not an effective king.
Point the second: Robert survived as long as he did because he really did not give a shit about what was happening to the realm. Ned would actually try to run the country responsibly and piss off powerful people in the process.
Eh.
This is a question of timing but if Ned had been King in place of Robert he would have had no problems what so ever from these "powerful" people. Despite how much people like to claim he sucks at politics he would have pretty unshakeable support from The North, The Riverlands, The Vale and the Reach.
Even if Dorne and Highgarden somehow managed to work together and join the Lannisters they'd still be pretty fucked and Highgarden has zero reason to do it in the first place and Dorne is unlikely to try and avenge Elia by working with her murderer.
That's assuming he somehow unnecessarily provokes the Lannisters. He probably could have won Tywin's undying support by stripping Jamie of the white. Ned would like to do it given the whole Aerys thing and Tywin would (secretly) be all for it if it gave him his heir back.
Also, Jon Arryn was a good hand of the king, ran things well while Robert went out whoring and fighting and running up enormous debts.
Others > 7 Idiotic Kingdoms
Dragons > Others
Greyjoy > Dragons?
For better or worse, Westeros needs to get invaded pretty damn quick for everyone's sake. Nobody currently on the continent is prepared for what's coming.
Except Ned did great as ruler for the entirety of Robert's rule and would have contiued along had he not been dragged south.
spoilering for further book details...
twit feed
My HOPE is that they're saving money skipping out on the puny early battles so they can show us at least SOME of the major battles. I would be totally OK if they did it Rome style and just showed relevant characters + montage of fighting + aftermath.
Book 2/season 2 spoilers