|
SPOILER WARNING If you only watch the show, this thread will spoil you of future events in HBO's Game of Thrones. Thread contains discussion of all books of the series A Song of Ice and FireClick Here for the spoiler-free thread. |
On May 02 2013 07:43 acker wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2013 04:16 ecstazy wrote:
Stannis is just as self-entitled and demanding as Dany. He assassinated his brother and wastefully assaulted the King's landing while being fully aware of the casualties his army would sustain. He wants that throne and his excuse for why he should have it is exactly the same as Dany's. He is as much a rightful king as Daenerys is a rightful queen. Just depends on whether you appreciate Aegon's conquest or Robert's conquest more.
As to Astapor? When she came there it was a disgusting place. Now that she left, it's still a disgusting place, but now she has an army. She'll take that trade any day. No one ever said she was a saint (ok some say it, but they are wrong).
It takes a rather selective reading of the text to not realize that Renly was doing his utmost to kill Stannis. For someone so concerned about Stannis' troops, you seem to not realize that Renly's method of kinslaying would have ended with a literal mountain of corpses. Stannis does not want the throne, he doesn't understand why anyone would want the Iron Throne from conversations with Davos. He simply believes it's his duty to become King, due to the line of secession. This sense of duty eventually goes well beyond simply sitting himself on the throne (which is what every other current contestant considers kingship to be), it extends to actual self-sacrifice for the realm. Save the kingdom to win the throne, not win the throne to save the kingdom... More importantly, Stannis can take insults and deeply personal criticism. When Davos or Jon tells him he's being a retard, Stannis listens. OTOH, Dany hasn't had the courage to even reflect on why Mad King Aerys had that particular prefix in front of his name yet...or think about how someone like the Evil Usurper got half the kingdom fighting on his side. Makes sense for someone whose motto is "if I look back I'm lost", but I hope she works out her family history before she gets to Westeros. Astapor was a bad place when Dany went there. Now it's a hellhole. Different levels of "terrible" exist, and Dany failed hard on that one. I find it interesting that Tywin states that no true ruler ever has to claim he is the ruler...yet Dany consistently asserts that she is the blood of the dragon. It's an interesting parallel.
^^this has been something that has always bugged me a lot about Danny
Speaking of potential kings and queens, what is a reasonable list of people that could on the iron throne by the end of the books?
Does this sound right?
Danny
Stannis
Aegon
Jon Snow
Euron
Cersei
Tommen
Myrcella and Trystane
What happens legally, if Tommen, Myrcella, Cersei and Stannis all die? Does the throne pass to Edric Storm?
|
On May 02 2013 08:41 itkovian wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2013 07:43 acker wrote:On May 02 2013 04:16 ecstazy wrote:
Stannis is just as self-entitled and demanding as Dany. He assassinated his brother and wastefully assaulted the King's landing while being fully aware of the casualties his army would sustain. He wants that throne and his excuse for why he should have it is exactly the same as Dany's. He is as much a rightful king as Daenerys is a rightful queen. Just depends on whether you appreciate Aegon's conquest or Robert's conquest more.
As to Astapor? When she came there it was a disgusting place. Now that she left, it's still a disgusting place, but now she has an army. She'll take that trade any day. No one ever said she was a saint (ok some say it, but they are wrong).
It takes a rather selective reading of the text to not realize that Renly was doing his utmost to kill Stannis. For someone so concerned about Stannis' troops, you seem to not realize that Renly's method of kinslaying would have ended with a literal mountain of corpses. Stannis does not want the throne, he doesn't understand why anyone would want the Iron Throne from conversations with Davos. He simply believes it's his duty to become King, due to the line of secession. This sense of duty eventually goes well beyond simply sitting himself on the throne (which is what every other current contestant considers kingship to be), it extends to actual self-sacrifice for the realm. Save the kingdom to win the throne, not win the throne to save the kingdom... More importantly, Stannis can take insults and deeply personal criticism. When Davos or Jon tells him he's being a retard, Stannis listens. OTOH, Dany hasn't had the courage to even reflect on why Mad King Aerys had that particular prefix in front of his name yet...or think about how someone like the Evil Usurper got half the kingdom fighting on his side. Makes sense for someone whose motto is "if I look back I'm lost", but I hope she works out her family history before she gets to Westeros. Astapor was a bad place when Dany went there. Now it's a hellhole. Different levels of "terrible" exist, and Dany failed hard on that one. I find it interesting that Tywin states that no true ruler ever has to claim he is the ruler...yet Dany consistently asserts that she is the blood of the dragon. It's an interesting parallel. ^^this has been something that has always bugged me a lot about Danny Speaking of potential kings and queens, what is a reasonable list of people that could on the iron throne by the end of the books? Does this sound right? Danny Stannis Aegon Jon Snow Euron Cersei Tommen Myrcella and Trystane What happens legally, if Tommen, Myrcella, Cersei and Stannis all die? Does the throne pass to Edric Storm?
Littlefinger.
Sansa. <-mostly just for being the most likely queen to a male winner.
Arianne.
Tyrion, but he is probably a darker horse than even Arianne.
Not Euron. Not Cersei.
Not Myrcella and Trystane because Arianne would be before Trystane to anything and at this point the only people who think Myrcella and Tommen are anything are those who are playing friendly with the Lannisters. The Dornish are not among those people.
Jalabhar Xho! ...because that guy has to do something eventually, right? He just hangs around court for two decades being mentioned periodically.
In the interest of a "the others win or it is some kind of draw" scenario it is:
Bran
|
On May 02 2013 08:41 itkovian wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2013 07:43 acker wrote:On May 02 2013 04:16 ecstazy wrote:
Stannis is just as self-entitled and demanding as Dany. He assassinated his brother and wastefully assaulted the King's landing while being fully aware of the casualties his army would sustain. He wants that throne and his excuse for why he should have it is exactly the same as Dany's. He is as much a rightful king as Daenerys is a rightful queen. Just depends on whether you appreciate Aegon's conquest or Robert's conquest more.
As to Astapor? When she came there it was a disgusting place. Now that she left, it's still a disgusting place, but now she has an army. She'll take that trade any day. No one ever said she was a saint (ok some say it, but they are wrong).
It takes a rather selective reading of the text to not realize that Renly was doing his utmost to kill Stannis. For someone so concerned about Stannis' troops, you seem to not realize that Renly's method of kinslaying would have ended with a literal mountain of corpses. Stannis does not want the throne, he doesn't understand why anyone would want the Iron Throne from conversations with Davos. He simply believes it's his duty to become King, due to the line of secession. This sense of duty eventually goes well beyond simply sitting himself on the throne (which is what every other current contestant considers kingship to be), it extends to actual self-sacrifice for the realm. Save the kingdom to win the throne, not win the throne to save the kingdom... More importantly, Stannis can take insults and deeply personal criticism. When Davos or Jon tells him he's being a retard, Stannis listens. OTOH, Dany hasn't had the courage to even reflect on why Mad King Aerys had that particular prefix in front of his name yet...or think about how someone like the Evil Usurper got half the kingdom fighting on his side. Makes sense for someone whose motto is "if I look back I'm lost", but I hope she works out her family history before she gets to Westeros. Astapor was a bad place when Dany went there. Now it's a hellhole. Different levels of "terrible" exist, and Dany failed hard on that one. I find it interesting that Tywin states that no true ruler ever has to claim he is the ruler...yet Dany consistently asserts that she is the blood of the dragon. It's an interesting parallel. ^^this has been something that has always bugged me a lot about Danny Speaking of potential kings and queens, what is a reasonable list of people that could on the iron throne by the end of the books? Does this sound right? Danny Stannis Aegon Jon Snow Euron Cersei Tommen Myrcella and Trystane What happens legally, if Tommen, Myrcella, Cersei and Stannis all die? Does the throne pass to Edric Storm?
Legally it'd be Shireen right? Then again I'm not sure if legitimate female > bastard male. Edric is the only legitimised bastard of Robert's, so he'd probably be after Shireen. It probably reads: Tommen / Stannis > Myrcella / Shireen > Edric > other Robert bastards.
If they all die, succession probably becomes far more unusual. Probably some really roundabout thing in the vein of how "Harry the Heir" is a potential successor to the Vale. Like Robert's cousins step-brother's son. The Baratheon line might be on of the less explored of all major houses.
Re potential rulers:
- Sansa & Harry (if that's what happens) have as much claim as Euron (which is to say: conquest). There's interesting discussions around about her becoming a player.
- Cersei is a no. She is only Queen Regent at most, she has no legitimate claim to the throne, or just as much as Margery (which is very little).
I have this theory that it might end as a somewhat democracy with all the kingdoms broken once again, but we'll see. I mean, there's some legitimately pure kids coming through as heirs to their kingdoms far sooner because of the war.
The end could look a bit like: Theon, Tommen, Edric, Dany, Rickon, Sansa, Arianne & Margery on a council. Or something like that.
|
On May 02 2013 08:57 bittman wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2013 08:41 itkovian wrote:On May 02 2013 07:43 acker wrote:On May 02 2013 04:16 ecstazy wrote:
Stannis is just as self-entitled and demanding as Dany. He assassinated his brother and wastefully assaulted the King's landing while being fully aware of the casualties his army would sustain. He wants that throne and his excuse for why he should have it is exactly the same as Dany's. He is as much a rightful king as Daenerys is a rightful queen. Just depends on whether you appreciate Aegon's conquest or Robert's conquest more.
As to Astapor? When she came there it was a disgusting place. Now that she left, it's still a disgusting place, but now she has an army. She'll take that trade any day. No one ever said she was a saint (ok some say it, but they are wrong).
It takes a rather selective reading of the text to not realize that Renly was doing his utmost to kill Stannis. For someone so concerned about Stannis' troops, you seem to not realize that Renly's method of kinslaying would have ended with a literal mountain of corpses. Stannis does not want the throne, he doesn't understand why anyone would want the Iron Throne from conversations with Davos. He simply believes it's his duty to become King, due to the line of secession. This sense of duty eventually goes well beyond simply sitting himself on the throne (which is what every other current contestant considers kingship to be), it extends to actual self-sacrifice for the realm. Save the kingdom to win the throne, not win the throne to save the kingdom... More importantly, Stannis can take insults and deeply personal criticism. When Davos or Jon tells him he's being a retard, Stannis listens. OTOH, Dany hasn't had the courage to even reflect on why Mad King Aerys had that particular prefix in front of his name yet...or think about how someone like the Evil Usurper got half the kingdom fighting on his side. Makes sense for someone whose motto is "if I look back I'm lost", but I hope she works out her family history before she gets to Westeros. Astapor was a bad place when Dany went there. Now it's a hellhole. Different levels of "terrible" exist, and Dany failed hard on that one. I find it interesting that Tywin states that no true ruler ever has to claim he is the ruler...yet Dany consistently asserts that she is the blood of the dragon. It's an interesting parallel. ^^this has been something that has always bugged me a lot about Danny Speaking of potential kings and queens, what is a reasonable list of people that could on the iron throne by the end of the books? Does this sound right? Danny Stannis Aegon Jon Snow Euron Cersei Tommen Myrcella and Trystane What happens legally, if Tommen, Myrcella, Cersei and Stannis all die? Does the throne pass to Edric Storm? Legally it'd be Shireen right? Then again I'm not sure if legitimate female > bastard male. Edric is the only legitimised bastard of Robert's, so he'd probably be after Shireen. It probably reads: Tommen / Stannis > Myrcella / Shireen > Edric > other Robert bastards. If they all die, succession probably becomes far more unusual. Probably some really roundabout thing in the vein of how "Harry the Heir" is a potential successor to the Vale. Like Robert's cousins step-brother's son. The Baratheon line might be on of the less explored of all major houses. Re potential rulers: - Sansa & Harry (if that's what happens) have as much claim as Euron (which is to say: conquest). There's interesting discussions around about her becoming a player. - Cersei is a no. She is only Queen Regent at most, she has no legitimate claim to the throne, or just as much as Margery (which is very little). I have this theory that it might end as a somewhat democracy with all the kingdoms broken once again, but we'll see. I mean, there's some legitimately pure kids coming through as heirs to their kingdoms far sooner because of the war. The end could look a bit like: Theon, Tommen, Edric, Dany, Rickon, Sansa, Arianne & Margery on a council. Or something like that.
Recognised is not legitimised. Edric is nothing, just like how Jon had* no claims to Stark holdings or titles.
Shireen has a strong claim after her father as his heir. Her odds of ever becoming powerful are a bit south of Hot Pie's though. She is a good example of the limits of legal claims in the absence of other power.
Cersei has few to no legal claims, but her actual power and ability to win wouldn't be bad if it wasn't for Cersei. Put Littlefinger or Tyrion's mind in her body circa book 2 or 3 and he'd have probably won by now, penis or no.
Harry won't be anything because he is just a background character who has been distantly mentioned. That would be even worse than Aegon turning out to be a winner after only being introduced, as a plot twist and without being a PoV, in book 5.
Realpolitik is, and has been, the rule since Robert died. Claims are pretty, but only matter so far as how many swords you can help bring to your cause with them.
|
Hah! Hot Pie for King!
But really, Tommen is still king at this point isn't he? So if there was more fighting, but nothing was really accomplished strategically, and everyone just crawled back to their own kingdoms, Tommen would still rule. Like, if Danny's boats crashed before she reached westeros. Aegon's army is put down. Dorne tries to start something but is squashed. The Vale stays quite. The Iron Born are crushed after things settle down. The north suffers tremendous infighting, and afterwards has no power to do anything. And Stannis dies. Then Tommen rules
Obviously, I don't think thats what is going to happen, but its a possibility. Or if that all happened, but Tommen died. Then Myrcella and Trystane? I don't think the Doran or Arianne hold anything against Myrcella, just the other Lannisters.
|
Russian Federation59 Posts
On May 02 2013 07:43 acker wrote:
It takes a rather selective reading of the text to not realize that Renly was doing his utmost to kill Stannis. For someone so concerned about Stannis' troops, you seem to not realize that Renly's method of kinslaying would have ended with a literal mountain of corpses.
Stannis does not want the throne, he doesn't understand why anyone would want the Iron Throne from conversations with Davos. He simply believes it's his duty to become King, due to the line of secession. This sense of duty eventually goes well beyond simply sitting himself on the throne (which is what every other current contestant considers kingship to be), it extends to actual self-sacrifice for the realm. Save the kingdom to win the throne, not win the throne to save the kingdom...
More importantly, Stannis can take insults and deeply personal criticism. When Davos or Jon tells him he's being a retard, Stannis listens. OTOH, Dany hasn't had the courage to even reflect on why Mad King Aerys had that particular prefix in front of his name yet...or think about how someone like the Evil Usurper got half the kingdom fighting on his side. Makes sense for someone whose motto is "if I look back I'm lost", but I hope she works out her family history before she gets to Westeros.
Astapor was a bad place when Dany went there. Now it's a hellhole. Different levels of "terrible" exist, and Dany failed hard on that one. I find it interesting that Tywin states that no true ruler ever has to claim he is the ruler...yet Dany consistently asserts that she is the blood of the dragon. It's an interesting parallel.
Renly would have probably not have killed Stannis unless by accident during fighting. He wouldn't have needed to do that, since he already had way more forces that all turned a blind eye on the official line of succession. Kin slaying is frowned upon.
Daneerys believes it's her duty to become queen due to line of succession, Just like Stannis. If she knew something was wrong with the kingdom, she would have proabably wanted to save it too. She knows nothing of the white walkers. Also, lets be honest - Stannis only went to the wall because he couldn't take king's landing.
Reflection here is not about courage. She is a 14 year old girl who was abused all her life and you expect her to reflect on the crimes of her father she never even knew? Besides I'm pretty sure, she had that conversation with Barristan and it was implied that she acknowledged that her father was not a good person (although like any person she hopes there was at least some good in him). Stannis takes criticism from Davos (Jon didn't really criticize him, just refused some of his plans, because he had the power to do so), but Dany has no one like that. All her allies are recent and she does not fully trust them. Besides, she is nothing like the Mad King. All her decisions logically made sense at the time and she is in a decent spot. She might go insane later, but for now it's all good and she is in a decent spot to take the throne (assuming she gets Victarion's ships and the Dothraki).
Astapor is not worse now than before Dany got there. Or did you already forget the Unsullied training routines?
|
On May 02 2013 18:31 ecstazy wrote:
Reflection here is not about courage. She is a 14 year old girl who was abused all her life and you expect her to reflect on the crimes of her father she never even knew?
I want her to reflect on the crimes she has committed. The results of her insane attempt at conquest has most likely racked up a higher body count than each of the contenders in the Wot5K, or Tywin's for that matter, and she hasn't even gotten to Westeros yet.
As for her father, yes she should reflect on the fact that her father was a fucking nutjob who enjoyed burning people alive, and that the majority of the kingdoms rallied to depose his ass. Maybe if she did she would stop threatning to come back when her dragons are grown and burn everyone that doesn't give her free shit just cause of her last name.
On May 02 2013 18:31 ecstazy wrote:
Astapor is not worse now than before Dany got there
lol
|
|
|
On May 02 2013 10:34 itkovian wrote:
Hah! Hot Pie for King!
But really, Tommen is still king at this point isn't he? So if there was more fighting, but nothing was really accomplished strategically, and everyone just crawled back to their own kingdoms, Tommen would still rule. Like, if Danny's boats crashed before she reached westeros. Aegon's army is put down. Dorne tries to start something but is squashed. The Vale stays quite. The Iron Born are crushed after things settle down. The north suffers tremendous infighting, and afterwards has no power to do anything. And Stannis dies. Then Tommen rules
Obviously, I don't think thats what is going to happen, but its a possibility. Or if that all happened, but Tommen died. Then Myrcella and Trystane? I don't think the Doran or Arianne hold anything against Myrcella, just the other Lannisters.
I think Tommen is as good as gone with GRRM saying "there will be many on the throne before the end"
Killed by a Dornish Sand Snake is my guess.
Dorne declares for Aegon or Daenerys and Myrcella bites it. (or stays hostage)
And then what? I mean by that time it is literally up for grabs. Because Stannis is the rightful heir but the Lannister and Tyrell alliance still holds Kings Landing and the physical Throne. Although the Alliance might split because of this.
|
On May 03 2013 07:44 Doppelganger wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2013 10:34 itkovian wrote:
Hah! Hot Pie for King!
But really, Tommen is still king at this point isn't he? So if there was more fighting, but nothing was really accomplished strategically, and everyone just crawled back to their own kingdoms, Tommen would still rule. Like, if Danny's boats crashed before she reached westeros. Aegon's army is put down. Dorne tries to start something but is squashed. The Vale stays quite. The Iron Born are crushed after things settle down. The north suffers tremendous infighting, and afterwards has no power to do anything. And Stannis dies. Then Tommen rules
Obviously, I don't think thats what is going to happen, but its a possibility. Or if that all happened, but Tommen died. Then Myrcella and Trystane? I don't think the Doran or Arianne hold anything against Myrcella, just the other Lannisters.
I think Tommen is as good as gone with GRRM saying "there will be many on the throne before the end" Killed by a Dornish Sand Snake is my guess. Dorne declares for Aegon or Daenerys and Myrcella bites it. (or stays hostage) And then what? I mean by that time it is literally up for grabs. Because Stannis is the rightful heir but the Lannister and Tyrell alliance still holds Kings Landing and the physical Throne. Although the Alliance might split because of this.
the lannisters will manage to break that alliance easily, they're already losing their influential males, cersei's making a big mess of everything and the tyrells are simply taking over their spots everywhere. There are more tyrells anyway, they didnt really get into the fighting yet (other than the assault on kings landing)
|
On May 03 2013 07:44 Doppelganger wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2013 10:34 itkovian wrote:
Hah! Hot Pie for King!
But really, Tommen is still king at this point isn't he? So if there was more fighting, but nothing was really accomplished strategically, and everyone just crawled back to their own kingdoms, Tommen would still rule. Like, if Danny's boats crashed before she reached westeros. Aegon's army is put down. Dorne tries to start something but is squashed. The Vale stays quite. The Iron Born are crushed after things settle down. The north suffers tremendous infighting, and afterwards has no power to do anything. And Stannis dies. Then Tommen rules
Obviously, I don't think thats what is going to happen, but its a possibility. Or if that all happened, but Tommen died. Then Myrcella and Trystane? I don't think the Doran or Arianne hold anything against Myrcella, just the other Lannisters.
I think Tommen is as good as gone with GRRM saying "there will be many on the throne before the end" Killed by a Dornish Sand Snake is my guess. Dorne declares for Aegon or Daenerys and Myrcella bites it. (or stays hostage) And then what? I mean by that time it is literally up for grabs. Because Stannis is the rightful heir but the Lannister and Tyrell alliance still holds Kings Landing and the physical Throne. Although the Alliance might split because of this.
I don't think Myrcella dies. Assuming Tommen dies, as long as Tyrion is banished she becomes the heir to Castery Rock so instead of marrying a princess, the Martell's can gain the West. Of course, whoever ends up as king is likely to want to make sure that Robert's supposes line is finished and can't eventually make a claim. And since Myrcella is born of incest, I suppose that could nullify her in succession of Castery Rock.
|
Did everyone forget Maggy the Frog's prophecy?
http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/Prophecies/Entry/1827
The prophecy (which has thus far been coming true) predicts that Cersei's children will not outlive her. I wouldn't be placing bets on Tommen and Myrcella inheriting anything (for too long at least).
|
Prophecies are not always true. I'm inclined to think that one will be, but it shouldn't be a hard rule that determines the discussion.
I want to no longer be much of a Dany fan after book 5. She proved she cannot rule well. Too often after someone else says something to that effect I need to play devil's advocate to question it because there are double standards and selective reasoning being thrown around quite liberally around her.
What about Robbs crimes? Or Stannis? Or every single person who is playing the game? Everyone seems to love Robb but as the brotherhood points out countless times the wolves burn and rape just as sure as the lions. These are all feudal nobles, with no claim that we of a modern society have reason to care about, burning nations in order to take the top. In the most recent episode of the show incarnation Varys said as much of LF, but I challenge anyone to point to a player for whom his statement is not true.
Maybe, MAYBE Dorne under prince Doran? Even he is aiming to go to war for vengeance and as a "veto" attempt against certain other claims, though he may not be aiming so much to take his own power.
Then there is Varys himself, who milked conflicts in order to set things to be optimal for his Aegon's attempt to rise.
In every modern justice system I am aware of, the intent of the perpetrator is of great importance in determining the nature of the crime. This is why there is such a thing as "manslaughter" as opposed to "murder" or "ops, nvm, we are cool" as opposed to "theft". Dany wanted to free slaves, but bungled it and made a spectacular mess. Robb wanted to take the position of King in the North, and made an almost as spectacular mess. The results are similar, but taking into account their intent the point goes to Dany. Why is she demonised as the "mad queen"?
|
Tommen and Myrcella are so innocent, and seem so kind hearted. While I admit it would be rather boring, and unlikely, for one of them to remain on the throne, it sucks that they'll have to get the axe.
On May 03 2013 08:12 moopie wrote:Did everyone forget Maggy the Frog's prophecy? http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/Prophecies/Entry/1827The prophecy (which has thus far been coming true) predicts that Cersei's children will not outlive her. I wouldn't be placing bets on Tommen and Myrcella inheriting anything (for too long at least).
Bah! Prophecies take the fun out of everything!
I hate being told the ending of a story, in the middle of it story.
Are there any big examples, in any book or series, of prophecies being told, that ended up being flat out wrong? Often they'll be manipulated or twisted to produce an outcome that the reader didn't see coming, but there must be some that were just strait up false..
|
One time I read some crazy theory with Arya replacing Myrcella, but can't find it =(
|
On May 03 2013 09:33 itkovian wrote:Tommen and Myrcella are so innocent, and seem so kind hearted. While I admit it would be rather boring, and unlikely, for one of them to remain on the throne, it sucks that they'll have to get the axe. Bah! Prophecies take the fun out of everything! I hate being told the ending of a story, in the middle of it story. Are there any big examples, in any book or series, of prophecies being told, that ended up being flat out wrong? Often they'll be manipulated or twisted to produce an outcome that the reader didn't see coming, but there must be some that were just strait up false..
Dany's son being the stallion that will mount the world. At least it seems there's no way to make that one come trough without really stretching it. Still, ussually a big reason why some prophecies are reliable and others are not is the source. There's fake magic and false prophets just like anywhere else, but I don't think there's a case of someone we know about having reliable phophecies giving a false one. And Maggy seems very reliable so far.
|
On May 03 2013 09:42 SKC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 09:33 itkovian wrote:Tommen and Myrcella are so innocent, and seem so kind hearted. While I admit it would be rather boring, and unlikely, for one of them to remain on the throne, it sucks that they'll have to get the axe. On May 03 2013 08:12 moopie wrote:Did everyone forget Maggy the Frog's prophecy? http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/Prophecies/Entry/1827The prophecy (which has thus far been coming true) predicts that Cersei's children will not outlive her. I wouldn't be placing bets on Tommen and Myrcella inheriting anything (for too long at least). Bah! Prophecies take the fun out of everything! I hate being told the ending of a story, in the middle of it story. Are there any big examples, in any book or series, of prophecies being told, that ended up being flat out wrong? Often they'll be manipulated or twisted to produce an outcome that the reader didn't see coming, but there must be some that were just strait up false.. Dany's son being the stallion that will mount the world. At least it seems there's no way to make that one come trough without really stretching it. Still, ussually a big reason why some prophecies are reliable and others are not is the source. There's fake magic and false prophets just like anywhere else, but I don't think there's a case of someone we know about having reliable phophecies giving a false one. And Maggy seems very reliable so far.
If you interpret her dragons as sons then they stand a reasonable chance of doing something that might constitute "mounting the world". Dragons as superweapons is the obvious way to take that. The interesting interpretation in my opinion is that the far north is "up" in this case, and so the dragons going deep into the land of always winter would be on top of the world.
That said, I don't think we should expect prophecies to be too strong of indications of what will happen. Even if they are true the interpretations can be a coin flip. On the other hand, Maggy's did seem very direct and simple.
|
I seem to have lost all memory of the last book. Did Stannis and his army marching towards Winterfell(?) all die?
|
On May 03 2013 11:20 Agnosthar wrote:
I seem to have lost all memory of the last book. Did Stannis and his army marching towards Winterfell(?) all die?
Never stated. Bolton sent a crow saying that he had captured and killed Stannis, but in one of the preview chapters for the next book, Stannis is alive and well. It's likely that it's just a scare tactic from Roose and Ramsay. I expect Stannis to die at some point, but off screen in a dumb way is unlikely.
|
On May 03 2013 11:22 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 11:20 Agnosthar wrote:
I seem to have lost all memory of the last book. Did Stannis and his army marching towards Winterfell(?) all die?
Never stated. Bolton sent a crow saying that he had captured and killed Stannis, but in one of the preview chapters for the next book, Stannis is alive and well. It's likely that it's just a scare tactic from Roose and Ramsay. I expect Stannis to die at some point, but off screen in a dumb way is unlikely.
That preview chapter took place before the battle though. We do not know.
It seems like the letter was more likely from some combination of Stannis/Mance though, rather than Ramsay as it claimed to be. This might indicate that Stannis won, or his force won at least. Or it might have been sent before the battle too in an attempt to gain reinforcements from the watch for Stannis. I do not think Stannis would ever do this though.
I remember some spitballing of the possibility that after the battle Stannis' force might have won but Stannis died. This would leave an awkwardly leaderless force of dubious purpose gathered at Winterfell. Many of them would want to know wtf was going on with this girl, who some think is Arya but Reek says is not. They'd want to know for sure since saving that girl, if she is Arya, was the motivation for this venture for a good portion of them. The letter would then be a ruse to get Jon to show up and set things straight, both by confirm/denying this 'Arya' and possibly something involving that royal decree by Robb making Jon his heir. (If anyone there is aware of it, and some of the lords there might be)
We really do not know. The best leads are that it didn't entirely make sense to be from the Boltons nor is it Stannis' style to use a deception like that.
I think we can say that if the letter was sent after the battle then at least one of Roose or Stannis is dead. Those two figures each represent a veto on that 'side' having sent it. Roose wouldn't poke Jon like that nor would he allow Ramsay to and Stannis wouldn't use a ruse like that.
I agree that Stannis will not be alive by the midway point of book 6, if he survived the likely "off screen" battle of Winterfell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
