|
All book discussion in this thread is now allowed. |
Question, what was the night kings plan without a dragon? At this point he has to be able to see the future because if not hes the luckiest dude ever.
Also wasnt it mentioned that "the wall" is not just a big pile of ice but that it has magic that prevent the dead for crossing it? Whats the difference between "burning it down" and doing what the wildlings did like breaking the gate or making a big camp fire.
I liked the first half of the episode a lot, mostly because of Peter Dinklage´s acting but it felt like all this episode did was bringing the wall down anticlimactic and smash everyone in his Season 7 starting position.
The whole meeting scene i was waiting for Dany to lean over to Tyrion and ask "Why am i not burning them right now and solve 50% of our problems without harming any innocent? They are even neatly together and seperated from our guys".
Man that would have saved that season big time for me.
|
|
|
On August 30 2017 02:45 Micro_Jackson wrote:
Question, what was the night kings plan without a dragon? At this point he has to be able to see the future because if not hes the luckiest dude ever.
Also wasnt it mentioned that "the wall" is not just a big pile of ice but that it has magic that prevent the dead for crossing it? Whats the difference between "burning it down" and doing what the wildlings did like breaking the gate or making a big camp fire.
I liked the first half of the episode a lot, mostly because of Peter Dinklage´s acting but it felt like all this episode did was bringing the wall down anticlimactic and smash everyone in his Season 7 starting position.
The whole meeting scene i was waiting for Dany to lean over to Tyrion and ask "Why am i not burning them right now and solve 50% ofo our problems without harming any innocent? They are even neatly together and seperated from our guys".
Man that would have saved that season big time for me.
No plan, yes the wall is magic, burning down part of it is unclear how that impacts the magic. Presumably the magic doesn't apply to that part of the wall that's missing anymore I guess.
Also agreed, it's kind of silly Dany doesn't just burn Cersei alive and end the war immediately though it would be quite dishonorable to do so and could cause major loyalty problems. I really thought they should have done the scene in the basement like when Jaime met Tyrion; it would make sense as a way to prevent Dany from bringing her dragons. The official reason is probably that Dany doesn't want to have to deal with the remaining Baratheon/Lannister loyalists causing problems while they fight the dead.
|
On August 30 2017 02:48 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2017 02:45 Micro_Jackson wrote:
Question, what was the night kings plan without a dragon? At this point he has to be able to see the future because if not hes the luckiest dude ever.
Also wasnt it mentioned that "the wall" is not just a big pile of ice but that it has magic that prevent the dead for crossing it? Whats the difference between "burning it down" and doing what the wildlings did like breaking the gate or making a big camp fire.
I liked the first half of the episode a lot, mostly because of Peter Dinklage´s acting but it felt like all this episode did was bringing the wall down anticlimactic and smash everyone in his Season 7 starting position.
The whole meeting scene i was waiting for Dany to lean over to Tyrion and ask "Why am i not burning them right now and solve 50% ofo our problems without harming any innocent? They are even neatly together and seperated from our guys".
Man that would have saved that season big time for me. No plan, yes the wall is magic, burning down part of it is unclear how that impacts the magic. Presumably the magic doesn't apply to that part of the wall that's missing anymore I guess. Also agreed, it's kind of silly Dany doesn't just burn Cersei alive and end the war immediately though it would be quite dishonorable to do so and could cause major loyalty problems. I really thought they should have done the scene in the basement like when Jaime met Tyrion; it would make sense as a way to prevent Dany from bringing her dragons. The official reason is probably that Dany doesn't want to have to deal with the remaining Baratheon/Lannister loyalists causing problems while they fight the dead.
I see your point but Dani had no real problem burning the Tarly family. And i think they werent as hated as Cersei is.
The decision to make cersei just straight up a queen was kinda dumb because it threw every rule about succession out of the window. For 6 seasons the king had to be a male and he had to be legitimate and from the ruling family.
|
On August 30 2017 03:27 Micro_Jackson wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2017 02:48 Logo wrote:On August 30 2017 02:45 Micro_Jackson wrote:
Question, what was the night kings plan without a dragon? At this point he has to be able to see the future because if not hes the luckiest dude ever.
Also wasnt it mentioned that "the wall" is not just a big pile of ice but that it has magic that prevent the dead for crossing it? Whats the difference between "burning it down" and doing what the wildlings did like breaking the gate or making a big camp fire.
I liked the first half of the episode a lot, mostly because of Peter Dinklage´s acting but it felt like all this episode did was bringing the wall down anticlimactic and smash everyone in his Season 7 starting position.
The whole meeting scene i was waiting for Dany to lean over to Tyrion and ask "Why am i not burning them right now and solve 50% ofo our problems without harming any innocent? They are even neatly together and seperated from our guys".
Man that would have saved that season big time for me. No plan, yes the wall is magic, burning down part of it is unclear how that impacts the magic. Presumably the magic doesn't apply to that part of the wall that's missing anymore I guess. Also agreed, it's kind of silly Dany doesn't just burn Cersei alive and end the war immediately though it would be quite dishonorable to do so and could cause major loyalty problems. I really thought they should have done the scene in the basement like when Jaime met Tyrion; it would make sense as a way to prevent Dany from bringing her dragons. The official reason is probably that Dany doesn't want to have to deal with the remaining Baratheon/Lannister loyalists causing problems while they fight the dead. I see your point but Dani had no real problem burning the Tarly family. And i think they werent as hated as Cersei is. The decision to make cersei just straight up a queen was kinda dumb because it threw every rule about succession out of the window. For 6 seasons the king had to be a male and he had to be legitimate and from the ruling family.
There are no males left in the Baratheon Line. She's the appropriate heir I believe. Though if Stannis just sat at Dragonstone biding his time he would have gotten the seat after Tommen :D.
I think the succession line at Robert's death (ignoring incest and passing the throne to Ned) would have been Joffery -> Tommen -> Mycella -> Stannis -> Renly -> Cersei.
Though Mycella and Cersei would be expected to marry causing the line to diverge.
|
On August 30 2017 02:45 Micro_Jackson wrote:
Question, what was the night kings plan without a dragon? At this point he has to be able to see the future because if not hes the luckiest dude ever.
Also wasnt it mentioned that "the wall" is not just a big pile of ice but that it has magic that prevent the dead for crossing it? Whats the difference between "burning it down" and doing what the wildlings did like breaking the gate or making a big camp fire.
we don't know, because he obtained a dragon.
reasonably? we can conclude he would use some kind of magic to destroy the wall, it's clear he has power beyond what we expected (ex: killing the dragon with relative ease). i don't think this is a major plot hole like a few people in the thread are mentioning
|
On August 30 2017 03:52 -Frog- wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2017 02:45 Micro_Jackson wrote:
Question, what was the night kings plan without a dragon? At this point he has to be able to see the future because if not hes the luckiest dude ever.
Also wasnt it mentioned that "the wall" is not just a big pile of ice but that it has magic that prevent the dead for crossing it? Whats the difference between "burning it down" and doing what the wildlings did like breaking the gate or making a big camp fire. we don't know, because he obtained a dragon. reasonably? we can conclude he would use some kind of magic to destroy the wall, it's clear he has power beyond what we expected (ex: killing the dragon with relative ease). i don't think this is a major plot hole like a few people in the thread are mentioning
What kind of magic is the wall if the one thing it's keeping out has magic explicitly to destroy it? Like the wall is worse than useless in that scenario since it endangers anyone who tries to defend it.
|
On August 30 2017 02:45 Micro_Jackson wrote:
Question, what was the night kings plan without a dragon? At this point he has to be able to see the future because if not hes the luckiest dude ever.
Also wasnt it mentioned that "the wall" is not just a big pile of ice but that it has magic that prevent the dead for crossing it? Whats the difference between "burning it down" and doing what the wildlings did like breaking the gate or making a big camp fire.
I liked the first half of the episode a lot, mostly because of Peter Dinklage´s acting but it felt like all this episode did was bringing the wall down anticlimactic and smash everyone in his Season 7 starting position.
The whole meeting scene i was waiting for Dany to lean over to Tyrion and ask "Why am i not burning them right now and solve 50% of our problems without harming any innocent? They are even neatly together and seperated from our guys".
Man that would have saved that season big time for me.
Writers have no balls, I guess.
|
On August 30 2017 03:29 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2017 03:27 Micro_Jackson wrote:On August 30 2017 02:48 Logo wrote:On August 30 2017 02:45 Micro_Jackson wrote:
Question, what was the night kings plan without a dragon? At this point he has to be able to see the future because if not hes the luckiest dude ever.
Also wasnt it mentioned that "the wall" is not just a big pile of ice but that it has magic that prevent the dead for crossing it? Whats the difference between "burning it down" and doing what the wildlings did like breaking the gate or making a big camp fire.
I liked the first half of the episode a lot, mostly because of Peter Dinklage´s acting but it felt like all this episode did was bringing the wall down anticlimactic and smash everyone in his Season 7 starting position.
The whole meeting scene i was waiting for Dany to lean over to Tyrion and ask "Why am i not burning them right now and solve 50% ofo our problems without harming any innocent? They are even neatly together and seperated from our guys".
Man that would have saved that season big time for me. No plan, yes the wall is magic, burning down part of it is unclear how that impacts the magic. Presumably the magic doesn't apply to that part of the wall that's missing anymore I guess. Also agreed, it's kind of silly Dany doesn't just burn Cersei alive and end the war immediately though it would be quite dishonorable to do so and could cause major loyalty problems. I really thought they should have done the scene in the basement like when Jaime met Tyrion; it would make sense as a way to prevent Dany from bringing her dragons. The official reason is probably that Dany doesn't want to have to deal with the remaining Baratheon/Lannister loyalists causing problems while they fight the dead. I see your point but Dani had no real problem burning the Tarly family. And i think they werent as hated as Cersei is. The decision to make cersei just straight up a queen was kinda dumb because it threw every rule about succession out of the window. For 6 seasons the king had to be a male and he had to be legitimate and from the ruling family. There are no males left in the Baratheon Line. She's the appropriate heir I believe. Though if Stannis just sat at Dragonstone biding his time he would have gotten the seat after Tommen :D. I think the succession line at Robert's death (ignoring incest and passing the throne to Ned) would have been Joffery -> Tommen -> Mycella -> Stannis -> Renly -> Cersei. Though Mycella and Cersei would be expected to marry causing the line to diverge.
Guessing because the show doesn't clarify anything about this:
If Westerosi succession laws are similar to those from medieval Europe, Cersei wouldn't inherit anything. She's not a Baratheon, she was just supposed to mother Baratheon kids. Even Shireen would inherit before her. Stannis and Renly should also take priority over Myrcella. Ignoring the incest ofc
Maaaybe Cersei could inherit the title, but only if there would be 0 Baratheon fathered kids left and the last living person on the throne would be Joffrey or Tommen. Then, she would have a chance because as their mother.
1. Joffrey -> Tommen -> Stannis -> Renly -> ???
2. Joffery -> Tommen -> Myrcella (if daugthers before uncles) -> Stannis -> Renly -> closest Renly's relative ?
3. Joffrey -> Tommen -> (Stannis and Renly dead before Tommen) -> Myrcella -> Cersei ? Tywin ? Tyrion ? (Jaime can't inherit as long as he was in the Kingsguard, I know he's not now)
4. Joffrey -> Tommen -> Stannis -> Renly (dead before Stannis) - Shireen
|
On August 30 2017 04:40 Sent. wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2017 03:29 Logo wrote:On August 30 2017 03:27 Micro_Jackson wrote:On August 30 2017 02:48 Logo wrote:On August 30 2017 02:45 Micro_Jackson wrote:
Question, what was the night kings plan without a dragon? At this point he has to be able to see the future because if not hes the luckiest dude ever.
Also wasnt it mentioned that "the wall" is not just a big pile of ice but that it has magic that prevent the dead for crossing it? Whats the difference between "burning it down" and doing what the wildlings did like breaking the gate or making a big camp fire.
I liked the first half of the episode a lot, mostly because of Peter Dinklage´s acting but it felt like all this episode did was bringing the wall down anticlimactic and smash everyone in his Season 7 starting position.
The whole meeting scene i was waiting for Dany to lean over to Tyrion and ask "Why am i not burning them right now and solve 50% ofo our problems without harming any innocent? They are even neatly together and seperated from our guys".
Man that would have saved that season big time for me. No plan, yes the wall is magic, burning down part of it is unclear how that impacts the magic. Presumably the magic doesn't apply to that part of the wall that's missing anymore I guess. Also agreed, it's kind of silly Dany doesn't just burn Cersei alive and end the war immediately though it would be quite dishonorable to do so and could cause major loyalty problems. I really thought they should have done the scene in the basement like when Jaime met Tyrion; it would make sense as a way to prevent Dany from bringing her dragons. The official reason is probably that Dany doesn't want to have to deal with the remaining Baratheon/Lannister loyalists causing problems while they fight the dead. I see your point but Dani had no real problem burning the Tarly family. And i think they werent as hated as Cersei is. The decision to make cersei just straight up a queen was kinda dumb because it threw every rule about succession out of the window. For 6 seasons the king had to be a male and he had to be legitimate and from the ruling family. There are no males left in the Baratheon Line. She's the appropriate heir I believe. Though if Stannis just sat at Dragonstone biding his time he would have gotten the seat after Tommen :D. I think the succession line at Robert's death (ignoring incest and passing the throne to Ned) would have been Joffery -> Tommen -> Mycella -> Stannis -> Renly -> Cersei. Though Mycella and Cersei would be expected to marry causing the line to diverge. Guessing because the show doesn't clarify anything about this: If Westerosi succession laws are similar to those from medieval Europe, Cersei wouldn't inherit anything. She's not a Baratheon, she was just supposed to mother Baratheon kids. Even Shireen would inherit before her. Stannis and Renly should also take priority over Myrcella. Ignoring the incest ofc Maaaybe Cersei could inherit the title, but only if there would be 0 Baratheon fathered kids left and the last living person on the throne would be Joffrey or Tommen. Then, she would have a chance because as their mother. 1. Joffrey -> Tommen -> Stannis -> Renly -> ??? 2. Joffery -> Tommen -> Myrcella (if daugthers before uncles) -> Stannis -> Renly -> closest Renly's relative ? 3. Joffrey -> Tommen -> (Stannis and Renly dead before Tommen) -> Myrcella -> Cersei ? Tywin ? Tyrion ? (Jaime can't inherit as long as he was in the Kingsguard, I know he's not now) 4. Joffrey -> Tommen -> Stannis -> Renly (dead before Stannis) - Shireen
Except that if you get far enough away from Robert, it doesn't really matter anymore. The reason Robert became king is because
(1) His rebellion was successful, and
(2) Of the rebellion leaders (Ned, Robert and Jon Arryn, later Tywin Lannister), he (nominally) had the most Tagaryen blood and was thus the most "legitimate" of them. Remember that the 7 kingdoms were 7 separate kingdoms before Aegon Tagaryen came and conquered them all, so legitimacy to rule over all the kingdoms is somehow measured by how much Tagaryen bood you have (or how directly you can trace your ancestry to Aegon the Conqueror).
That said, clearly at that point the story had progressed past legitimacy, and Cersei ruled because might makes right, and in King's Landing, she was mighty. Well, until dragons. This clearly isn't an argument against Dany just roasting her in dragonfire.
|
Maaaybe Cersei could inherit the title, but only if there would be 0 Baratheon fathered kids left and the last living person on the throne would be Joffrey or Tommen. Then, she would have a chance because as their mother.
I forgot Shireen in my list, good catch, but otherwise that hypothetical was the case. Robert only had 2 brothers and no cousins so there's no living Baratheon left after Stannis died.
Well there is the question of illegitimate bastards; the show does pose Gendry as a potential heir. In this case though no one knows the bastards are around (or care to reveal it) so Cersei would still be next in line unless/until someone pipped up about it.
|
On August 30 2017 03:29 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2017 03:27 Micro_Jackson wrote:On August 30 2017 02:48 Logo wrote:On August 30 2017 02:45 Micro_Jackson wrote:
Question, what was the night kings plan without a dragon? At this point he has to be able to see the future because if not hes the luckiest dude ever.
Also wasnt it mentioned that "the wall" is not just a big pile of ice but that it has magic that prevent the dead for crossing it? Whats the difference between "burning it down" and doing what the wildlings did like breaking the gate or making a big camp fire.
I liked the first half of the episode a lot, mostly because of Peter Dinklage´s acting but it felt like all this episode did was bringing the wall down anticlimactic and smash everyone in his Season 7 starting position.
The whole meeting scene i was waiting for Dany to lean over to Tyrion and ask "Why am i not burning them right now and solve 50% ofo our problems without harming any innocent? They are even neatly together and seperated from our guys".
Man that would have saved that season big time for me. No plan, yes the wall is magic, burning down part of it is unclear how that impacts the magic. Presumably the magic doesn't apply to that part of the wall that's missing anymore I guess. Also agreed, it's kind of silly Dany doesn't just burn Cersei alive and end the war immediately though it would be quite dishonorable to do so and could cause major loyalty problems. I really thought they should have done the scene in the basement like when Jaime met Tyrion; it would make sense as a way to prevent Dany from bringing her dragons. The official reason is probably that Dany doesn't want to have to deal with the remaining Baratheon/Lannister loyalists causing problems while they fight the dead. I see your point but Dani had no real problem burning the Tarly family. And i think they werent as hated as Cersei is. The decision to make cersei just straight up a queen was kinda dumb because it threw every rule about succession out of the window. For 6 seasons the king had to be a male and he had to be legitimate and from the ruling family. There are no males left in the Baratheon Line. She's the appropriate heir I believe. Though if Stannis just sat at Dragonstone biding his time he would have gotten the seat after Tommen :D. I think the succession line at Robert's death (ignoring incest and passing the throne to Ned) would have been Joffery -> Tommen -> Mycella -> Stannis -> Renly -> Cersei. Though Mycella and Cersei would be expected to marry causing the line to diverge.
Cersei never inherits the crown legally by any succession scheme I'm aware of.
Robert dies
His kids inherit, oldest to youngest. Depending on the succession laws, girls are either ignored or go after youngest brother (or rarely, after more distant male relatives).
Robert->Joffrey, Tommen, (Myrcella)
-If any of them had kids it would go to them (e.g. if Margery had a kid with Joff/Tomm, she would become the Queen Mother and a regency would take place).
-Since not, we go to Robert's siblings. Failing them, we go to their kids or grandkids.
Robert->Joffrey, Tommen, (Myrcella) -->Stannis -->(Shireen) -->Renly
-Since all that line is extinct, we go up a generation. Robert's uncles and their kids, grandkids, etc.
-Failing that, we go up another generation: Robert's granduncles and their line.
-And so on and so forth. It keeps going to ever more distant Baratheons and their progeny (who, if going through a female line, may not be Baratheon after all).
At no point does the crown go to Cersei or any other spouses or non-agnates. Legally. Her taking it was usurpation, plain and simple.
|
FWIW I looked up a family tree of the Baratheons here: http://i.imgur.com/2XbymFm.jpg
And the line would pass to House Lannister if the Baratheon line was extinct a few generations up and descent can pass through women, by was of Elyanna Baratheon, who married Mathin Lannister. That said, that marriage was without issue that survived infancy, according to the Lannister tree here: http://i.imgur.com/AMXxtuf.jpg
Edit: though the whole "can the line pass through women" thing was controversial enough to cause the 100 Years Wars, so I'm not taking any positions on that... [ducks under hail of crossbow and longbow fire.]
|
On August 30 2017 06:57 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +Maaaybe Cersei could inherit the title, but only if there would be 0 Baratheon fathered kids left and the last living person on the throne would be Joffrey or Tommen. Then, she would have a chance because as their mother.
I forgot Shireen in my list, good catch, but otherwise that hypothetical was the case. Robert only had 2 brothers and no cousins so there's no living Baratheon left after Stannis died. Well there is the question of illegitimate bastards; the show does pose Gendry as a potential heir. In this case though no one knows the bastards are around (or care to reveal it) so Cersei would still be next in line unless/until someone pipped up about it.
"Potential" is important here because the bastard can't legitimize himself and Robert (as a parent) is dead, so he can't marry the bastard's mother to legitizmie him. The king (whoever that is) could legitimize the bastard later, and if he did so, the bastard would no longer be a (legitimate or not) bastard, but a normal heir. Would be funny if, for example, Queen Myrcella legitimized Gendry because then he could claim that the throne is his by right, though I would defend the interpretation where he needed to be legitimized before Myrcella's coronation to have that right.
On August 30 2017 07:14 Yoav wrote:FWIW I looked up a family tree of the Baratheons here: http://i.imgur.com/2XbymFm.jpgAnd the line would pass to House Lannister if the Baratheon line was extinct a few generations up and descent can pass through women, by was of Elyanna Baratheon, who married Mathin Lannister. That said, that marriage was without issue that survived infancy, according to the Lannister tree here: http://i.imgur.com/AMXxtuf.jpgEdit: though the whole "can the line pass through women" thing was controversial enough to cause the 100 Years Wars, so I'm not taking any positions on that... [ducks under hail of crossbow and longbow fire.]
Reminded me of The Accursed Kings. From wikipedia:
Set during the reigns of the last five kings of the Capetian dynasty and the first two kings of the House of Valois, the series begins as the French King Philip the Fair, already surrounded by scandal and intrigue, brings a curse upon his family when he persecutes the Knights Templar. The succession of monarchs that follows leads France and England to the Hundred Years' War.
American author George R. R. Martin called The Accursed Kings "the original game of thrones", citing Druon's novels as an inspiration for his own series A Song of Ice and Fire.
Would recommend, though it's definitely less "gritty" and action-packed than Martin's books.
|
On August 30 2017 03:52 -Frog- wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2017 02:45 Micro_Jackson wrote:
Question, what was the night kings plan without a dragon? At this point he has to be able to see the future because if not hes the luckiest dude ever.
Also wasnt it mentioned that "the wall" is not just a big pile of ice but that it has magic that prevent the dead for crossing it? Whats the difference between "burning it down" and doing what the wildlings did like breaking the gate or making a big camp fire. we don't know, because he obtained a dragon. reasonably? we can conclude he would use some kind of magic to destroy the wall, it's clear he has power beyond what we expected (ex: killing the dragon with relative ease). i don't think this is a major plot hole like a few people in the thread are mentioning
Remember when Dany was Captured by the warlocks like 3 or 4 seasons ago and her dragons burned away there magic chains?
Same idea I think. Dragon fire cleanses magic.
|
The Wall's magic is intended to keep out the dead and the White Walkers. So, the dead cannot cross it. Supposedly it extends beyond the Wall, to the sea on the side.
That being said, without a dragon, in the show the Night King would have no way of getting past the Wall. In the books there are other possible means, but it's a moot point now. The only "good" explanation would be that the Night King has seer abilities, but even then it's flimsy because the whole reason for the raid north of the Wall is still, to this day, incredibly stupid.
|
Canada8991 Posts
On August 30 2017 09:25 Spaylz wrote:
The Wall's magic is intended to keep out the dead and the White Walkers. So, the dead cannot cross it. Supposedly it extends beyond the Wall, to the sea on the side.
That being said, without a dragon, in the show the Night King would have no way of getting past the Wall. In the books there are other possible means, but it's a moot point now. The only "good" explanation would be that the Night King has seer abilities, but even then it's flimsy because the whole reason for the raid north of the Wall is still, to this day, incredibly stupid.
Was it ever said in the show that the wall had that kind of magic?
I just assume that wasn't a thing in the show only in the book, John and company were certain that the dead were gonna pass the wall, I just assume the dragon make quicker work of it.
|
On August 30 2017 09:38 Nakajin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2017 09:25 Spaylz wrote:
The Wall's magic is intended to keep out the dead and the White Walkers. So, the dead cannot cross it. Supposedly it extends beyond the Wall, to the sea on the side.
That being said, without a dragon, in the show the Night King would have no way of getting past the Wall. In the books there are other possible means, but it's a moot point now. The only "good" explanation would be that the Night King has seer abilities, but even then it's flimsy because the whole reason for the raid north of the Wall is still, to this day, incredibly stupid. Was it ever said in the show that the wall had that kind of magic? I just assume that wasn't a thing in the show only in the book, John and company were certain that the dead were gonna pass the wall, I just assume the dragon make quicker work of it.
I remember the youtube history's of game of thrones that the wall was built with the chlidren of the forrest and the first men so there was some kind of imbued magic in its construction, i cant remember if anyone has said that the wall cant be crossed by the undead, i doubt it works like disintergrating field where if u pass it u die because that wight they brought back definitely had to cross the wall somehow without dying. I personally think its just meant to be super strong and the magic makes it resilient to some attacks thay would normally destroy it but dragon fire trumps it.
I dont think the characters in the show even know if the wall has any magical properties especially undead killing ones so when they see the army of the dead marching. I dont think their logic is hey lets do nothing because 1000s of years ago they didnt manage to break the wall.
I still wonder what his plan was without the dragon, just sucide a million soldiers at the wall???
I dislike the farseer theory
|
My hope is that she doesn't respect the whole unburnt thing, and Cercei tries at some point to burn Dany with wildfire (because, familial irony and all that), and Dany just laughs while she walks up to cercei and embraces her.
|
Canada8991 Posts
On August 30 2017 10:10 Shock710 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2017 09:38 Nakajin wrote:On August 30 2017 09:25 Spaylz wrote:
The Wall's magic is intended to keep out the dead and the White Walkers. So, the dead cannot cross it. Supposedly it extends beyond the Wall, to the sea on the side.
That being said, without a dragon, in the show the Night King would have no way of getting past the Wall. In the books there are other possible means, but it's a moot point now. The only "good" explanation would be that the Night King has seer abilities, but even then it's flimsy because the whole reason for the raid north of the Wall is still, to this day, incredibly stupid. Was it ever said in the show that the wall had that kind of magic? I just assume that wasn't a thing in the show only in the book, John and company were certain that the dead were gonna pass the wall, I just assume the dragon make quicker work of it. I remember the youtube history's of game of thrones that the wall was built with the chlidren of the forrest and the first men so there was some kind of imbued magic in its construction, i cant remember if anyone has said that the wall cant be crossed by the undead, i doubt it works like disintergrating field where if u pass it u die because that wight they brought back definitely had to cross the wall somehow without dying. I personally think its just meant to be super strong and the magic makes it resilient to some attacks thay would normally destroy it but dragon fire trumps it. I dont think the characters in the show even know if the wall has any magical properties especially undead killing ones so when they see the army of the dead marching. I dont think their logic is hey lets do nothing because 1000s of years ago they didnt manage to break the wall. I still wonder what his plan was without the dragon, just sucide a million soldiers at the wall??? I dislike the farseer theory
Just bust the door? Or climb the wall even, there was like a couple dozens of man at the wall.
You can't say that there is magic protecting the wall in the show if they didn't tell it in the show, they can change whatever they want, it's their story. Anyway it's not very important they chose the dragon route, and for one I don't really care with that particular plot point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
