[blackzoid]

I shouted out "NO!" at Roose's fate. So much preferred him to Ramsey.
Bah.

[Traveller]

I wonder if they'll finish next ep with the flashback. And the scene with Jon being named/handed over as a finale.

I'm still waiting for Tyrion to get caught in a fire and 'unburned'; and realise his true lineage, but that unchaining scene was a far more subtle hint.

[Andorion]

Traveller, on 03 May 2016 - 09:54 AM, said:

I wonder if they'll finish next ep with the flashback. And the scene with Jon being named/handed over as a finale.

I'm still waiting for Tyrion to get caught in a fire and 'unburned'; and realise his true lineage, but that unchaining scene was a far more subtle hint.

Why would Tyrion be unburnt? targaryens are not fireproof. Dany was a freak incident due to magic

[Terez]

champ, on 03 May 2016 - 09:12 AM, said:

Terez, on 03 May 2016 - 05:49 AM, said:

PS: That was back when the DB at Malazan was considerably less laid-back. Maybe that's why these particular people left us. Some of them, I liked. Cold Iron and....OMG I FORGET HER NAME, help me out here guys.

Was it that Gem W or whatever the last name was?

Gem Windcaster, and nope. This chick had been around longer, was a bit older and wiser, a little bit crazy, and totally cool. Her name will come to me. I think Cold Iron followed her to Westeros.

PS: This was back when there were, like, 10 females on Malazan. That might be a slight exaggeration, but only a slight one.

Gorefest, on 03 May 2016 - 09:37 AM, said:

Terez, on 03 May 2016 - 06:26 AM, said:

I meant to comment on Davos; got distracted by the OT discussion. IMO it's not a stretch to portray Davos as Jon's champion here. Davos has always been attracted to integrity, and I think he made it clear that he saw that integrity in Jon. Stannis saw it too, and Davos respected that.

Personally I disagree. I felt it was completely contrary to Davos' character to ever ask for divine intervention from a woman and a religion he despises. No matter how desperate the situation. Davos has been continuously portrayed both in the books and the the TV show as an honourable righteous guy, even as a smuggler. I just cannot see this sudden change of personality as anything other than poor writing.

I know where you are coming from, but the man is unmoored, perhaps just as much as Melisandre. And as he has said in the show and the books, he's never been devout. Melisandre made him believe in something. He didn't like it, but he believed it. He saw his son(s) die because he convinced Stannis to leave her behind, not because of anything she did, but because of something she probably could have prevented. And he doesn't know about Shireen yet. With Stannis dead, he's desperate and he's grasping.

Ultimately I'd probably agree that it will be much better in the books, but that doesn't mean Davos would never ask for Melisandre's help. It just means the show isn't always great at portraying complex motivations.

This post has been edited by Terez: 03 May 2016 - 10:15 AM

[worry]

What change in personality? Why conclude something so vast as that? And why limit a "personality" to one set of choices? What's the difference between a man's personality and a robot's programming, if either dictates ahead of time its bearer's decision at every path's fork? If death and despair are not enough to realign one's priorities, then millions of people throughout history have woefully miswritten their own choices, and owe us -- those living in the wake of their self-mischaracterizations -- a mighty big apology.

[Gorefest]

Oponn Relationship, on 03 May 2016 - 10:13 AM, said:

What change in personality? Why conclude something so vast as that? And why limit a "personality" to one set of choices?

Because due to the limited and focused scope of a novel or a film/series for character development (i.e. these are 'people' you only see in flashes, they don't have a day-to-day existence that you are privy to), all that we get to know about a character's personality is through either their inner monologue or their actions/choices. And this one just rankled as inconsistent to me. It just seemed like a very sudden swing. But I guess desperate times do call for desperate measures.

[worry]

Aside from all that, who doesn't like magic tricks?

[blackzoid]

Kidna odd the way that Davos has yet to ask how Shireen is doing. Or ask about Stannis.

[Terez]

He asked about Stannis when Melisandre returned to the Wall. He probably assumed that Shireen died in the fighting somehow.

This post has been edited by Terez: 04 May 2016 - 02:18 AM

[Gorefest]

Oponn Relationship, on 03 May 2016 - 10:21 AM, said:

Aside from all that, who doesn't like magic tricks?

Wurble, the hapless victim of the Unfortunate Incident in Kartool in year 1162 of Burn's Sleep springs to mind. Poor sheep, too.

This post has been edited by Gorefest: 03 May 2016 - 10:35 AM

[Werthead]

QuickTidal, on 02 May 2016 - 01:48 PM, said:

So wait, wait, wait... you have zero issues with sacrificial magic (burning people) or the use of a host animal (warging) to achieve the goal of resurrection...but the spells she chanted and the ceremonial cutting and burning (<---that's obliviously the important part of the spell anyways) of his hair is somehow a problem?

All this magic is fictional. The difference between burning his hair while chanting a spell OR burning another human to gain a magical power back reserve...is completely negligible in the vein of fictional magic use.

Not really. It's poor drama. They could have burned Shireen to bring Jon back and then people would be like "Yay! Jon's back...oh, that's messed up." But they didn't, and just killed her last year for cheap shock value instead. They could have spun it out that Stannis's death and his entire army being sacrificed was the price demanded by the lord of light to allow Jon's return. In ASoIaF resurrection is not a cheap and easy thing to do and always comes at the cost of another life, or some sacrifice, or the person's soul and the show really didn't do that with Jon.

Quote

Also not a fan with how Roose went out so easily. I don't really buy the idea that this will work, and that people will believe Ramsay and follow him. But maybe it won't work, so we'll see.

I've got a feeling that the TV show is doing again what it's already done once: set up Joffrey as a psycho only to get rid of him, but immediately replace him with another psycho as the boo-hiss villain (Ramsay). It seems likely that the Bolton/North storyline will be resolved this season, so Ramsay may die at just the point another boo-hiss psycho villain (Euron) shows up. The books at least didn't have either Joffrey or Ramsay being quite so insane or so prevalent, and overlapped the storylines of the villains more effectively.

Quote

Except let's go back to how the show handled Thoros bringing Beric back when he explains it. It's not like he had to do some crazy spell, he just said the words...the god did the rest.

Except Beric comes back as a lesser person each time. If they do that with Jon and that becomes important, great, but from the look of it they're not.

Quote

Is Tyrion a Targaryen?

No. I actually think the "hints" to that end are a result of someone suggesting the theory to George and he decided to do it as a form of misdirection. Tyrion being a Targaryen would be ruinous to his character arc, and I don't think George should go there again (replacing Cersei's very believable and carefully-established motivations with a random prophecy from some lunatic wood witch decades earlier was bad enough).

You also don't need to be a Targaryen or even descended from Valyrians to ride dragons, George has said that a few times, and that the "three heads of the dragon" does not refer to three Targaryens (in fact, that statement is a leading bit of evidence to suggest that Aegon is a fake). I could be wrong, but I believe that the "three heads of the dragon" prophecy has never been referenced at all on the TV show, so in the show canon it's not even an issue.

Quote

I figured that was true for the most part, but there has to be a sizable contingent of people such as yourself who want to discuss the show anyway.

I do some of the discussion on the ASoIaf Facebook page, but the general attitude there to the show is overwhelmingly negative (I think that's a Facebook thing as well; the Malazan Facebook page is, if anything, even worse, but the WoT Facebook page is better, if more random). To be honest, most of the time I don't really discuss the show with anyone at all. I've been discussing the books and the story online for over eleven years, so there isn't really a huge amount new that can come up in discussion. The TV show is only interesting now because it hints at how the books might go, if very very roughly.

Quote

Westeros has always had that kind of aggressive atmosphere, much moreso than here, for example, but it got a lot worse with the show because there were so many new people. I imagine there are a lot of people who came to Westeros because the reddit subs were so overloaded. Now they're all overloaded. I wish there were somewhere to discuss the show between here (where the discussion is relatively slow) and reddit. Westeros isn't it, and that's a shame, because it should be. Stricter conduct moderation in the GOT forums would go a long way.

Yeah, Westeros has not handled the massive explosion of members as a result of the show too well, from a technical viewpoint or from a moderation one. There's a reason most of the seasoned regulars stay well out of the TV show and book forums most of the time after their initial period on the board.

Quote

Is this true also for the non GoT subforums? I usually lurk in literature and even there people are more aggressive/judgy than what I am comfortable with.

Westeros has a frank and forthright attitude, which to be honest I find refreshing from other forums who clamp down on any kind of legitimate criticism and wants everyone to validate everyone else. It can also tip over into assholishness rather easily. Our lives as moderators are not easy ones.

Quote

Why would Tyrion be unburnt? targaryens are not fireproof. Dany was a freak incident due to magic

In the books, yes. In the show, no. It's a key difference between the two: in the books Dany was resistant to fire on that one occasion due to the magic probably unconsciously generated from the deaths of Drogo and Mirri Maz Duur. In the Pit of Daznak she does get burned.

In the TV show, Targaryens/Valyrians are shown to be either immune to fire at all times or at least far more resistant to heat than normal people (like the scalding bath Dany had in episode one, and she handled the scalding hot dragon eggs after putting them in the fire with no problem). There is a slight issue with that and Viserys's death; Dany's statement "He is no dragon" may mean that Viserys had somehow abrogated his being a Targaryen through dishonour and lost his flameproofness, or that the molten gold far exceeded the heat levels that they can resist. Jon also got burned fighting the wight in the lord commander's quarters in Season 1, which they might have to explain on the TV show if he ends up being a Targ.

[Andorion]

Werthead, on 03 May 2016 - 11:07 AM, said:

QuickTidal, on 02 May 2016 - 01:48 PM, said:

So wait, wait, wait... you have zero issues with sacrificial magic (burning people) or the use of a host animal (warging) to achieve the goal of resurrection...but the spells she chanted and the ceremonial cutting and burning (<---that's obliviously the important part of the spell anyways) of his hair is somehow a problem?

All this magic is fictional. The difference between burning his hair while chanting a spell OR burning another human to gain a magical power back reserve...is completely negligible in the vein of fictional magic use.

Not really. It's poor drama. They could have burned Shireen to bring Jon back and then people would be like "Yay! Jon's back...oh, that's messed up." But they didn't, and just killed her last year for cheap shock value instead. They could have spun it out that Stannis's death and his entire army being sacrificed was the price demanded by the lord of light to allow Jon's return. In ASoIaF resurrection is not a cheap and easy thing to do and always comes at the cost of another life, or some sacrifice, or the person's soul and the show really didn't do that with Jon.

Quote

Also not a fan with how Roose went out so easily. I don't really buy the idea that this will work, and that people will believe Ramsay and follow him. But maybe it won't work, so we'll see.

I've got a feeling that the TV show is doing again what it's already done once: set up Joffrey as a psycho only to get rid of him, but immediately replace him with another psycho as the boo-hiss villain (Ramsay). It seems likely that the Bolton/North storyline will be resolved this season, so Ramsay may die at just the point another boo-hiss psycho villain (Euron) shows up. The books at least didn't have either Joffrey or Ramsay being quite so insane or so prevalent, and overlapped the storylines of the villains more effectively.

Quote

Except let's go back to how the show handled Thoros bringing Beric back when he explains it. It's not like he had to do some crazy spell, he just said the words...the god did the rest.

Except Beric comes back as a lesser person each time. If they do that with Jon and that becomes important, great, but from the look of it they're not.

Quote

Is Tyrion a Targaryen?

No. I actually think the "hints" to that end are a result of someone suggesting the theory to George and he decided to do it as a form of misdirection. Tyrion being a Targaryen would be ruinous to his character arc, and I don't think George should go there again (replacing Cersei's very believable and carefully-established motivations with a random prophecy from some lunatic wood witch decades earlier was bad enough).

You also don't need to be a Targaryen or even descended from Valyrians to ride dragons, George has said that a few times, and that the "three heads of the dragon" does not refer to three Targaryens (in fact, that statement is a leading bit of evidence to suggest that Aegon is a fake). I could be wrong, but I believe that the "three heads of the dragon" prophecy has never been referenced at all on the TV show, so in the show canon it's not even an issue.

Quote

I figured that was true for the most part, but there has to be a sizable contingent of people such as yourself who want to discuss the show anyway.

I do some of the discussion on the ASoIaf Facebook page, but the general attitude there to the show is overwhelmingly negative (I think that's a Facebook thing as well; the Malazan Facebook page is, if anything, even worse, but the WoT Facebook page is better, if more random). To be honest, most of the time I don't really discuss the show with anyone at all. I've been discussing the books and the story online for over eleven years, so there isn't really a huge amount new that can come up in discussion. The TV show is only interesting now because it hints at how the books might go, if very very roughly.

Quote

Westeros has always had that kind of aggressive atmosphere, much moreso than here, for example, but it got a lot worse with the show because there were so many new people. I imagine there are a lot of people who came to Westeros because the reddit subs were so overloaded. Now they're all overloaded. I wish there were somewhere to discuss the show between here (where the discussion is relatively slow) and reddit. Westeros isn't it, and that's a shame, because it should be. Stricter conduct moderation in the GOT forums would go a long way.

Yeah, Westeros has not handled the massive explosion of members as a result of the show too well, from a technical viewpoint or from a moderation one. There's a reason most of the seasoned regulars stay well out of the TV show and book forums most of the time after their initial period on the board.

Quote

Is this true also for the non GoT subforums? I usually lurk in literature and even there people are more aggressive/judgy than what I am comfortable with.

Westeros has a frank and forthright attitude, which to be honest I find refreshing from other forums who clamp down on any kind of legitimate criticism and wants everyone to validate everyone else. It can also tip over into assholishness rather easily. Our lives as moderators are not easy ones.

Quote

Why would Tyrion be unburnt? targaryens are not fireproof. Dany was a freak incident due to magic

In the books, yes. In the show, no. It's a key difference between the two: in the books Dany was resistant to fire on that one occasion due to the magic probably unconsciously generated from the deaths of Drogo and Mirri Maz Duur. In the Pit of Daznak she does get burned.

In the TV show, Targaryens/Valyrians are shown to be either immune to fire at all times or at least far more resistant to heat than normal people (like the scalding bath Dany had in episode one, and she handled the scalding hot dragon eggs after putting them in the fire with no problem). There is a slight issue with that and Viserys's death; Dany's statement "He is no dragon" may mean that Viserys had somehow abrogated his being a Targaryen through dishonour and lost his flameproofness, or that the molten gold far exceeded the heat levels that they can resist. Jon also got burned fighting the wight in the lord commander's quarters in Season 1, which they might have to explain on the TV show if he ends up being a Targ.

I am going to have to disagree on the last part.

In the books there are repeated mentions of Dany preferring hot baths, Also in both books and show Starks are a bit cold resistant. This is quite explicit in Book 1 when Ned stands naked before an open window in Winterfell.


So I don't think it would be unfair to argue that Starks and Targaryens have higher resistance to cold and heat respectively.


The He was no dragon line is in the books as well:

Quote

The sound Viserys Targaryen made when that hideous iron helmet covered his face was like nothing human. His feet hammered a frantic beat against the dirt floor, slowed, stopped. Thick globs of molten gold dripped down onto his chest, setting the scarlet silk to smoldering … yet no drop of blood was spilled.
He was no dragon, Dany thought, curiously calm. Fire cannot kill a dragon.

Yet after this we know that Targaryens can in fact get burnt. Dany was burnt, others have burnt. So the show having that line was basically quoting the book. So I don't think the show is going to go with "Targs are fireproof" narrative

[Terez]

I am def on the Tyrion=Targ train. Have been for a while. I believe we have had this conversation before, but I just can't wrap my head around the opinion that it ruins his character arc. Tywin was his father, whether by blood or not, just as Ned was Jon's father. Any adopted child could tell you how this works. Tyrion took after Tywin in certain aspects of his personality because he was comparably intelligent and raised by Tywin. And it's not so bad for Tyrion to escape the Kinslayer title on a technicality. (Though Tywin is technically his mother's cousin and still kin.)

This post has been edited by Terez: 03 May 2016 - 11:22 AM

[Tapper]

blackzoid, on 03 May 2016 - 09:47 AM, said:

I shouted out "NO!" at Roose's fate. So much preferred him to Ramsey.
Bah.

But Roose would never be stupid enough to actually squander the North by making it hate him more than they fear him. Ramsay on the other hand...

For the series, this is the quickest way to topple the Boltons, but it's also fairly hamfisted and something GRRM might resolve differently.

[Tapper]

QuickTidal, on 02 May 2016 - 04:58 PM, said:

Tapper, on 02 May 2016 - 02:44 PM, said:

Not really. Mel needed a combination of blood and fire to get her magic done in these series, whether it was via leeched blood, bastards or a king's (brother's) daughter. Then, for resurrection, suddenly hair clippings were enough?
I bet Gendry wouldn't have stepped in a boat if a visit to the barber sufficed.

Except let's go back to how the show handled Thoros bringing Beric back when he explains it. It's not like he had to do some crazy spell, he just said the words...the god did the rest.

[Melisandre enters the Brotherhood's hideout unannounced]
Beric Dondarrion: Forgive my manners. I don't see many ladies these days.
Thoros of Myr: Lucky for the ladies.
[Melisandre walks over to Beric and examines his scars]
Melisandre: [to Thoros] How many times has the Lord brought him back?
Thoros of Myr: Six.
[Melisandre looks shocked]
Melisandre: [in High Valyrian] That's not possible.
Thoros of Myr: [in High Valyrian] The Lord has smiled upon me.
Melisandre: [in High Valyrian] You should not have this power.
Thoros of Myr: [in High Valyrian] I have no power. I ask the Lord for His favor, and He responds as He will.
[Thoros sits down by the fire]
Thoros of Myr: [in English] I've always been a terrible priest. Drank too much rum. Fucked all the whores in King's Landing. It's a terrible thing to say, but... by the time I came to Westeros, I didn't believe in our Lord. I decided that He, that all the gods, were stories we told the children to make them behave. So I wore the robes, and every now and then, I'd recite the prayers. It was just for show. A spectacle for the locals. Until the Mountain drove a lance through this one's heart.
[Thoros points at Beric]
Thoros of Myr: I knelt beside his cold body, and said the old words. Not because I believed in them, but... he was my friend. And he was dead. And they were the only words I knew. And for the first time in my life, the Lord replied. Beric's eyes opened. And I knew the truth: our God is the one true God... and all men must serve Him.
Melisandre: [to Beric] You've been to the other side?
Beric Dondarrion: The other side? There IS no other side. I have been to the darkness, my lady.
[pause]
Beric Dondarrion: He sent you to us for a reason.
Melisandre: You have someone He needs.

Sure, now what about Melisandre summoning a shadow assassin through her vagina?
Melisandre is a woman and Thoros a man, and it seems likely that this influences the way their magic works, maybe even limits what they can do.

Melisandre's magic so far has been ritualistic and hardly spontaneous. One could even say that she has always just channeled power, sometimes literally through herself.

Maybe the rituals aren't required and it is just her anchor, maybe resurrection is a special case because it is 'just' a simple request to their god, maybe the old lines are a spell in and of themselves and only now is there enough magic in the world for it to work, but to deny that her magic has been fairly consistently blood/birth/fire centric is going against visual and literal evidence.

[Terez]

I thought her quiet "please" at the end was to show that she was basically in the same spot as Thoros was when Beric was resurrected. Desperate, and all out of faith. She said it herself: Thoros shouldn't have been able to do what he did because of the kind of priest he was (not a good one). But maybe the resurrection power is different from the powers Melisandre has displayed so far. Maybe R'hllor's magic can be either good or evil, depending on the circumstances.

Either way, Beric's resurrection was cheap. No particular death to pay for his life, or anything like that, though I guess you could argue his resurrections were paid for by the blood shed by Gregor and his lot.

[blackzoid]

Terez, on 03 May 2016 - 11:22 AM, said:

I am def on the Tyrion=Targ train. Have been for a while. I believe we have had this conversation before, but I just can't wrap my head around the opinion that it ruins his character arc. Tywin was his father, whether by blood or not, just as Ned was Jon's father. Any adopted child could tell you how this works. Tyrion took after Tywin in certain aspects of his personality because he was comparably intelligent and raised by Tywin. And it's not so bad for Tyrion to escape the Kinslayer title on a technicality. (Though Tywin is technically his mother's cousin and still kin.)

I always preferred the possibility of Cersei and Jaime being secret Targs than Tyrion.
It helps with the whole incest thing and Cersei's crazyness.
Tyrion as the actual son of Tywin works much better than as a secret Targ I think.

[Terez]

IMO impotent Tywin makes sense, so they might all be Aerys's children. But Tyrion is the important one. Lots of people quote the thing about Tyrion being Tywin's true son, or whatever it was. To me, that's the irony.

[champ]

Gorefest, on 03 May 2016 - 09:37 AM, said:

Terez, on 03 May 2016 - 06:26 AM, said:

I meant to comment on Davos; got distracted by the OT discussion. IMO it's not a stretch to portray Davos as Jon's champion here. Davos has always been attracted to integrity, and I think he made it clear that he saw that integrity in Jon. Stannis saw it too, and Davos respected that.

Personally I disagree. I felt it was completely contrary to Davos' character to ever ask for divine intervention from a woman and a religion he despises. No matter how desperate the situation. Davos has been continuously portrayed both in the books and the the TV show as an honourable righteous guy, even as a smuggler. I just cannot see this sudden change of personality as anything other than poor writing.

Found this from the show runners - taken from: http://uk.ign.com/ar...big-final-scene

Quote

"Davos has no real love lost for Melisandre," said Weiss in the video. "He's seen what she's capable of. He's seen her do many impossible things. He's not a big fan of her god, he's not a big fan of her program, but there's certainly nothing to lose at this point. If it doesn't work, then it doesn't work."

[Werthead]

Quote

I am going to have to disagree on the last part.

In the books there are repeated mentions of Dany preferring hot baths, Also in both books and show Starks are a bit cold resistant. This is quite explicit in Book 1 when Ned stands naked before an open window in Winterfell.

So I don't think it would be unfair to argue that Starks and Targaryens have higher resistance to cold and heat respectively.

In the books the Targs can tolerate slightly higher heat than other people, yes, but they are not immune to fire at all times:

Quote

Granny: Do Targaryens become immune to fire once they "bond" to their dragons?

George_RR_Martin: Granny, thanks for asking that. It gives me a chance to clear up a common misconception. TARGARYENS ARE NOT IMMUNE TO FIRE! The birth of Dany's dragons was unique, magical, wonderous, a miracle. She is called The Unburnt because she walked into the flames and lived. But her brother sure as hell wasn't immune to that molten gold.

Revanshe: So she won't be able to do it again?

George_RR_Martin: Probably not.

But in the TV show Daenerys is shown as being immune to heat: the scaling bath in episode 1 is way off the charts, the burning dragon eggs she holds later on (which she doesn't even react to but badly burn Irri's hands), the funeral pyre and some screenshots from later in Season 6:

Spoiler

Dany is shown in the temple of the Dhosh Khaleen in Vaes Dothrak being told she will have to stay there forever. She disagrees. There is some sort of scuffle and then Drogon descends and burns the entire temple to the ground. Daenerys walks out unhurt and the awestruck Dothraki agree to follow her.

This won't unfold in the same way in the books because Drogon is already with Dany when the Dothraki find her.

Quote

Either way, Beric's resurrection was cheap. No particular death to pay for his life, or anything like that, though I guess you could argue his resurrections were paid for by the blood shed by Gregor and his lot.

But what came back wasn't Beric. It was a shadow of Beric, and with each resurrection he fades even further until what's left barely remembers being human.

I'm assuming they're not going that route with Jon.

Quote

I always preferred the possibility of Cersei and Jaime being secret Targs than Tyrion. It helps with the whole incest thing and Cersei's crazyness. Tyrion as the actual son of Tywin works much better than as a secret Targ I think.

I'm not keen on any of them being Targs. It's unnecessary. But I think it's marginally more thematically appropriate to have Cersei and Jaime being Aerys's and Tyrion being Tywin's. However, the WoIaF book seems to rule out that possibility, as Joanna was at Casterly Rock for the whole period when Jaime and Cersei were conceived and born whilst Aerys was in KL. The same wasn't true for Tyrion when there was a lot of back and forth going on.