On June 06 2013 06:54 Edlina wrote: One ting regarding Sansa and the remaining Starks which no one seems to have noted is that if, as I find reasonable to assume based on the previous discussions in this thread, Theon is being held by the Bolton bastard, then word of Bran and Rickon being alive should have reached Lord Bolton (and probably thereby also Tywin) via message from the bastard back early in season 3 after Theon told him.
Therefore, Tywin should be aware that the boys are still alive and that Bran is currently heir to (lord of) Winterfell and not Sansa.
Interesting point. I'm not sure Bolton and Tywin are the best of homies and share every bit of info with each other. This also goes between the bastard and Bolton. Also Theon might not have been interrogated about it enough to confess
On June 06 2013 16:02 ore0z wrote: Trailers and previews are considered spoilers too but are also used to hype. Spoilers can help.
Spoilers doesn't always ruin anticipation. There are those that come into episode 9 knowing what will happen but are still on the edge of their seat. What creates anticipation is the story telling.
I still watch this episode and am still on the esge of my seat up to the moment talisa gets stabbed in the stomach. I don't think I'm the only one here who does that
-.-
You know what, I think I can speak for everyone in this thread but if you enjoy spoilers so much there is an entire other thread where you'll be spoiled to your hearts delight because the fact you're equating a trailer or a episode preview with any substantial spoiler (like if someone we to say Ned Stark died just before S1 finale) and/or somehow making them analogous is ridiculous...
I don't care for spoilers. I dislike everyone being so uptight about spoilers though. I understand limiting spoilers to an extent but if you really don't want to get spoiled, which is hard this day and age, you should try and not go online. I do believe you can enjoy a show even if you have seen substantial spoilers though.
We are not making a third thread, but yeah. Please guys, stop arguing about spoilers in here. You guys are are ruining this thread for yourselves with all this "omg is this a spoiler !?!?" paranoia. We are actively monitoring this thread, spoilers are usually removed within seconds/minutes. We will never get it down to 0% spoilers, but that is a risk you guys got to live with if you want to use the internet
On June 06 2013 16:35 KadaverBB wrote: We are not making a third thread, but yeah. Please guys, stop arguing about spoilers in here. You guys are are ruining this thread for yourselves with all this "omg is this a spoiler !?!?" paranoia. We are actively monitoring this thread, spoilers are usually removed within seconds/minutes. We will never get it down to 0% spoilers, but that is a risk you guys got to live with if you want to use the internet
On June 06 2013 15:49 jcroisdale wrote: People who say be spoiled does not take away from the story, have a very small emotional spectrum. Part of any good story is anticipation. Not seeing how anticipation leads to a more enthralling story, is just ignorance.
Way to generalize....I don't care very much about being spoiled since I can enjoy a show or book for other reasons, such as good dialogue, acting, story development etc. It's the opinion of the fool that everyone who doesn't share his pov is ignorant and wrong.
I went ahead and made the important parts bold. This should help you when you re-read my post. Anticipation and not knowing add to the story telling experience. They serve to further bring a reader or watcher into the story. They care more about what is going to happen since its the unknown.
We can draw an easy parallel with a basketball game. While knowing the outcome would deter someone like me from watching, a dedicated fan could find enjoyment in watching.
On an ironic note you perfectly portray the ignorance I talk about. Being unable to see how anticipation adds to the story telling experience is ignorance.
Which is even funnier because ignorance is bliss. Here I am arguing that ignorance of the story is better then knowing. Yet your ignorance stops you from seeing this.
On June 06 2013 15:49 jcroisdale wrote: People who say be spoiled does not take away from the story, have a very small emotional spectrum. Part of any good story is anticipation. Not seeing how anticipation leads to a more enthralling story, is just ignorance.
Way to generalize....I don't care very much about being spoiled since I can enjoy a show or book for other reasons, such as good dialogue, acting, story development etc. It's the opinion of the fool that everyone who doesn't share his pov is ignorant and wrong.
I went ahead and made the important parts bold. This should help you when you re-read my post. Anticipation and not knowing add to the story telling experience. They serve to further bring a reader or watcher into the story. They care more about what is going to happen since its the unknown.
We can draw an easy parallel with a basketball game. While knowing the outcome would deter someone like me from watching, a dedicated fan could find enjoyment in watching.
On an ironic note you perfectly portray the ignorance I talk about. Being unable to see how anticipation adds to the story telling experience is ignorance.
Which is even funnier because ignorance is bliss. Here I am arguing that ignorance of the story is better then knowing. Yet your ignorance stops you from seeing this.
All you are doing is argue from personal experience, to you all that seems to matter is your own subjective point of view. You say I'm unable to see how see anticipation adds to the story, something which I can see rather clearly, but not something everyone will agree with. You yourself seem wholly unable to comprehend that other people don't think like you do. Claiming that people who don't mind spoilers have a "small emotional spectrum" is a rather large assumtion, and one you have no basis for. "Ignorance is bliss" sums up your argument rather well.
On June 06 2013 15:49 jcroisdale wrote: People who say be spoiled does not take away from the story, have a very small emotional spectrum. Part of any good story is anticipation. Not seeing how anticipation leads to a more enthralling story, is just ignorance.
Way to generalize....I don't care very much about being spoiled since I can enjoy a show or book for other reasons, such as good dialogue, acting, story development etc. It's the opinion of the fool that everyone who doesn't share his pov is ignorant and wrong.
I went ahead and made the important parts bold. This should help you when you re-read my post. Anticipation and not knowing add to the story telling experience. They serve to further bring a reader or watcher into the story. They care more about what is going to happen since its the unknown.
We can draw an easy parallel with a basketball game. While knowing the outcome would deter someone like me from watching, a dedicated fan could find enjoyment in watching.
On an ironic note you perfectly portray the ignorance I talk about. Being unable to see how anticipation adds to the story telling experience is ignorance.
Which is even funnier because ignorance is bliss. Here I am arguing that ignorance of the story is better then knowing. Yet your ignorance stops you from seeing this.
All you are doing is argue from personal experience, to you all that seems to matter is your own subjective point of view. You say I'm unable to see how see anticipation adds to the story, something which I can see rather clearly, but not something everyone will agree with. You yourself seem wholly unable to comprehend that other people don't think like you do. Claiming that people who don't mind spoilers have a "small emotional spectrum" is a rather large assumtion, and one you have no basis for. "Ignorance is bliss" sums up your argument rather well.
Ok you win im so confused and can't continue this fruitless battle.
I believe there can be several ways to enjoy a story, in several instances.
You can enjoy the suspense the first time you watch it (I do anyways). and you can enjoy all the little details you can start paying attention to in the second read / watch. Personally, I like to experience emotions from both instances. If one of those is not for you, fine, but I think you can be reasonable and see how others DO enjoy different ways of viewing something.
Just as someone can enjoy a book for the thrill of not knowing (what Martin talks about in the youtube clip, when he talks about "being scared of flipping the page"), you can enjoy the subtle details in your second session. There doesnt have to be 1 correct way of experiencing something.
It doesn't matter if some people don't mind to be spoiled. The fact is, some people don't want to be spoiled, so everyone have to respect that and do their best not to spoile.
On June 06 2013 10:11 Hitch-22 wrote: ^if you spoiled, a 7700 post account, you should be perm banned from this site.
How can i spoil something when I stated in the first sentence that I havent read the books or been spoiled at all ?
I just made a prediction based on the current events and my imagination. I'm sure I've gotten something right so thats why you are that buthurt mr. book reader !
We are kinda spoiled in this thread all the time by the book readers with their discussions about who has the bigger army and posting army numbers, who is the best swordsman/fighter and similar discussions but no one is harping on those posts "omgz spoilers".
you misunderstand, i'm not saying ned is better or even as good. what i'm saying is that you are overestimating the difference in their abilities based on nothing but conjecture
i did rewatch the fight. jaime is also grunting and gritting his teeth. i watched closely and saw jaime smile once when he dodged a close slash to his face. obviously he's more likely to smile than ned, as he just ganged up on ned and killed his guards (who were his friends iirc)
Jaime smiles, because Jaimie loves fighting. Jaime is at his happiest when he is doing what he does best. Ned doesn't love fighting, he fights only when he must. And while I think Jaime is a better 1v1 swordsman than Ned, if I were planning a war, I'd rather have Ned on my side than Jaime. A good commander is better than a hundred good swordsmen and Ned is a flat out better commander. Ned is a better strategist and tactician. He inspires true loyalty from the troops under his command. Whatever loyalty Jaime inspires is derived out of fear of Jaime's father. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't even matter who the better swordsman is. They're fighting a war, not a 1v1 tournament. The Game of Thrones is not a contest of steel, but a contest of wits. Robb Stark is probably a better swordsman than Tywin Lannister, yet Tywin defeated Robb. Littlefinger is one of the worst swordsmen in the entire show, yet he's becoming a major player in the Game of Thrones anyway. Dany has never so much as lifted a sword in the show, yet she commands dragons and an ever increasing army. Being a great swordsman isn't that big a deal on this show, it's not going to keep you safe. This isn't Dragonball Z where the fate of the world is decided by which fighter has a higher power level. This is a game of power where as Varys says even "a very small man can cast a very large shadow."
It isn't indicated in TV series in any way that Ned Stark is even mediocre tactician and commander. He is respected by his closest and definitely is pictured as wise, experienced and calm man but he may be very crappy war leader. His crappy approach to politics in Kings' Landing indicate that he is no genius which is also a cap on his tactical skill. He is netiher NApoleon nor Alexander.
Also Jaime is at his happiest when he is doing his sister
The lore regarding Roberts Rebellion (you can watch these on youtube) regard him as a very skilled swordsmen as well as tactician. It becomes more obvious when Ser Barristan comments on how he slayed a dozen knights at the battle of the trident.
You have to understand, Robert and Ned were outnumbered during the rebellion by a solid chunk yet they were victorious; even without Tywin supporting either side the rebellion was out numbered and if they began losing even slightly then Tywin would have pledged to the King rather then sack the city.
Again due to the lore and the spoilers im not sure what I'm allowed to say. Ill just make the case that it could be argued that Ned was actually one of the best fighters ever, but underestimated, certainly prowess to match ser jamie, if you know the events of the rebellion and his sister.
GoT Wiki is allowed provided you don't cite the "In the Books" section, while the History and Lore of Westeros series put out by HBO every DVD season (and found on Youtube) is also acceptable, from what I can tell.
This is only acceptable if you specifically link to where you get your information from. Just saying "this is in the HBO lore videos" will get you banned just as fast as posting book content.
In general I would really like to have you, TSORG, and other book readers to just take your discussion elsewhere. You guys make moderating this thread really, really difficult.
can't believe he thought that would be OK to post. Please people, use your brain.
I reported it. I have a pretty good feeling what is going to happen next episode. Sigh .. ..
For actual solid reports I feel as if the 2 week is to lenient.. I mean do we really want, in general, people on Team Liquid that will go into threads and spoiler things maliciously?
I'm thinking 30 days to set an example for reports that mods know are spoilers and 2 weeks for "maybe". That's just me though, I was lucky enough not to spot the spoiler.
I am completely fine to perm ban people who maliciously spoil the story.
EPT
