[Nevyn]

Terez, on 09 May 2016 - 02:25 AM, said:

Still not convinced Jon has left the Watch for good. I figure he's just having a moment. His role is still against the White Walkers; he just has to consolidate the North first.

Part of the whole point of having him die is it is a loophole out of his vow. He can't really go killing Boltons if he refuses to leave his watch.

And whatever battle is coming at the wall or past it, Jon isn't going to beat the walkers with just the watch and the wildlings.

You don't have to be in the watch to fight Walkers.

[QuickTidal]

Nevyn, on 09 May 2016 - 01:23 PM, said:

Terez, on 09 May 2016 - 02:25 AM, said:

Still not convinced Jon has left the Watch for good. I figure he's just having a moment. His role is still against the White Walkers; he just has to consolidate the North first.

Part of the whole point of having him die is it is a loophole out of his vow. He can't really go killing Boltons if he refuses to leave his watch.

And whatever battle is coming at the wall or past it, Jon isn't going to beat the walkers with just the watch and the wildlings.

You don't have to be in the watch to fight Walkers.

^^This.

[Terez]

Nevyn, on 09 May 2016 - 01:23 PM, said:

Terez, on 09 May 2016 - 02:25 AM, said:

Still not convinced Jon has left the Watch for good. I figure he's just having a moment. His role is still against the White Walkers; he just has to consolidate the North first.

Part of the whole point of having him die is it is a loophole out of his vow. He can't really go killing Boltons if he refuses to leave his watch.

And whatever battle is coming at the wall or past it, Jon isn't going to beat the walkers with just the watch and the wildlings.

You don't have to be in the watch to fight Walkers.

Clearly, but he was (is) the Lord Commander of the Watch, so that in itself can't help but be significant for his end game role. He will be back.

[Nevyn]

Terez, on 09 May 2016 - 01:51 PM, said:

Clearly, but he was (is) the Lord Commander of the Watch, so that in itself can't help but be significant for his end game role. He will be back.

Of course it is not insignificant. It bought him the loyalty of the Wildlings, and if he does take Winterfell, will make him one of the few power players in Westeros that recognizes the walker threat and takes it seriously. He will be back to fight, but no reason to think he'll be back as a member of the watch.

[Terez]

Not just a member. The Lord Commander.

[Nevyn]

Terez, on 09 May 2016 - 02:23 PM, said:

Not just a member. The Lord Commander.

Doesn't matter. Stannis did not have to be lord commander to go north of the wall and rout the wildlings. The leader in the fight need not be lord commander.

[Terez]

Again, clearly. But it does matter that he's Lord Commander rather than just a grunt in the Watch. If he were just a grunt, then there probably wouldn't be any reason for him to reprise his role in the Watch.

[Terez]

Was anyone else disturbed by the fact that Gilly's baby is clearly 30 years old?

[QuickTidal]

Nevyn, on 09 May 2016 - 02:33 PM, said:

Terez, on 09 May 2016 - 02:23 PM, said:

Not just a member. The Lord Commander.

Doesn't matter. Stannis did not have to be lord commander to go north of the wall and rout the wildlings. The leader in the fight need not be lord commander.

Indeed, and I think moreover, the position of Lord Commander was thrust upon him when no one better could stand up amongst what was left of the modern skeleton Night's Watch (remembering that the other than Castle Black and a few other outposts, the Wall is LARGELY unguarded these days). He took that mantle up because it was what was required of him at the time...but there are WAY bigger fish to fry now. His death was indeed the way to get him out of his vows (without sacrificing his honour or code) and allow him out into the wider world.

You also don't go through the massive hoop of having him killed and reborn for the purpose of getting him out of his vow narratively...only to have him come back as Lord Commander.

The NW and the Wildlings will still be involved when the time comes to battle the White Walkers, but Jon has other things that need doing now...and if he came back to the Lord Commander post, it would ruin that entire plotline and its point.

[Terez]

I just never bought into the idea that the only reason for him to die was to get out of his vows. Maybe temporarily, but not permanently. Alternatively, you could argue that you don't go through 5 books of setting him up as Lord Commander only to have him look for the first excuse to get out of his vows.

[Gabriele]

Argh, this show as become such a travesty of the books, and Westeros, where I can rant to my heart's content, is down because of the traffic. Life sucks.

/rant over. I'll get me an

[amphibian]

Terez, on 09 May 2016 - 03:29 PM, said:

I just never bought into the idea that the only reason for him to die was to get out of his vows. Maybe temporarily, but not permanently. Alternatively, you could argue that you don't go through 5 books of setting him up as Lord Commander only to have him look for the first excuse to get out of his vows.

Being betrayed and murdered before a resurrection is the first excuse?

[Terez]

Justice was done for that. But my point is, it's a lot of build-up to him being Lord Commander for him to just walk away from it, for any reason. Sure, he's in a good position to unite the North behind the Wall, and a holiday makes that easier, but again, he'll be back.

I think this mindset bugs me mostly because people seem to think he needs to released from his vows to take the Iron Throne, or Winterfell, like permanently. The Iron Throne, I don't see at all at this point. Winterfell, maybe, but either Bran or Rickon would do for that job, and even if Jon were legitimized he wouldn't be Lord Stark. He'd be a Targaryen, heir to the Iron Throne, and again, I don't see him playing that role. It's not what he trained for.

[QuickTidal]

Terez, on 09 May 2016 - 03:29 PM, said:

I just never bought into the idea that the only reason for him to die was to get out of his vows. Maybe temporarily, but not permanently. Alternatively, you could argue that you don't go through 5 books of setting him up as Lord Commander only to have him look for the first excuse to get out of his vows.

The vow is very specific though, I assume on purpose.

But beyond that, an old interview with GRRM states: “My characters who come back from death are worse for wear. In some ways, they’re not even the same characters anymore. The body may be moving, but some aspect of the spirit is changed or transformed, and they’ve lost something.” Which follows with what we know about Beric after multiple returns from death...but if Jon is really not QUITE himself any longer, his old oath likely means even less to him.

Then add the fact that this really all does seem to be leading to Jon as Azor Ahai (and remember that this is the same episode that gave us at least the beginning of the Tower Of Joy where Lyanna is likely to have given birth to Jon, Rhaegar's kid...making Jon fit "The Prince That Was Promised" role even better as a Targaryen bloodline is noted in the prophecy IIRC) and things like the Night's Watch Lord Commandery is not really something he should/would pay attention to when there are far bigger things in the offing.

I think the passing of the torch to Edd was not just Jon being flippant, Edd is a perfect person to lead the NW going forward, and this positions the NW into the role of helping out when the time comes due to his friendship with Jon.

[Nevyn]

Terez, on 09 May 2016 - 04:14 PM, said:

Justice was done for that. But my point is, it's a lot of build-up to him being Lord Commander for him to just walk away from it, for any reason. Sure, he's in a good position to unite the North behind the Wall, and a holiday makes that easier, but again, he'll be back.

Its not a lot of build up, really. He was still relatively minor and Sam worked the vote to keep other guys out.

Plus LC was the presumed highest aspiration for him, due to the vow, which no longer applies

Quote

I think this mindset bugs me mostly because people seem to think he needs to released from his vows to take the Iron Throne, or Winterfell, like permanently. The Iron Throne, I don't see at all at this point. Winterfell, maybe, but either Bran or Rickon would do for that job, and even if Jon were legitimized he wouldn't be Lord Stark. He'd be a Targaryen, heir to the Iron Throne, and again, I don't see him playing that role. It's not what he trained for.

I'd say it is the opposite. Jon very well may not end up ruling Winterfell or sitting the throne. Who knows? But the only reason to stubbornly insist he will be back as LC is if you don't want him to be any of those things. We get it, it does not jive with your theory.

I have no idea what Jon will end up as. But it would be the dumbest story arc to have a massive slow reveal of his secret heritage, and then keep him in a job where who his parents are does not matter in the least.

LC is a nothing title as the NW are all but whiped out. You have already acknowledged he does not have to remain LC to lead the fight against the walkers. So what story purpose is there to having him return to the watch?

[QuickTidal]

Nevyn, on 09 May 2016 - 04:46 PM, said:

LC is a nothing title as the NW are all but whiped out.

You can even go as far as saying they were pretty much wiped out when Jon joined way back when. What was once a guardianship of 10,000 men strong...when Jon joins it's something like 1,000 spread across just three remaining Watch keeps (Castle Black, Eastwatch-By-The-Sea,and the Shadow Keep). It's a skeleton staff.

[Werthead]

Tatterdemalion, on 07 May 2016 - 01:14 AM, said:

I DO believe that GRRM got cold feet when his fanbase figured out all his careful plotting... and now is trying to change the game on us or one-up himself, when in truth he needs to just write the prophecies AS THEY ARE and let everyone enjoy the cleanliness of it. Not everything has to be M. Night Shamal-ALIENS!

Nope. Everything that George set up will come out as he planned. That's why he doesn't read the forums any more, and why Aegon still showed up in ADWD even when people had guessed it would happen for 13 years beforehand.

Quote

Was disappointed in tonight's episode. It feels like it was really short, for one thing; even the 'inside the episode' stuff was over by the end of the hour. And since I was hoping they would go back to the Tower of Joy, I felt cheated. They really shouldn't have hyped us for the Tower of Joy on Mother's Day if they weren't going to give us the goods.

That was a bit lame. I suspect it could be anything from another 2-5 episodes before we get that revelation, and it's tiresome for those of us who know what it's going to be (unless D&D pull some serious BS, which is entirely possible).

Quote

Didn't Ned remember killing Arthur Dayne personally? Maybe not. That's not so important to me, but it had the feel of being a B&W idea. In any case, I'm glad they didn't cut Howland Reed.

In the books the fight was a dream sequence, so anything from that doesn't really count. Ned does specifically remember that he'd be dead without Howland Reed, however, which does match this interpretation. I'm also bemused that Bran read so much into it: Ned was honourable but he wasn't an idiot, and he still rebelled against his lawful king. Ned was honourable up to a point, but in battle and in war and where his family was in danger he'd certainly take whatever strategy would work to win.

Quote

Huh. I don't love the heel turn of the Umbers, but that's just affection from the books I suppose. Plus I imagine what's left of the House are those who didn't ride south with Robb anyway? What I did like about that scene is that Ramsay finally has an outside world to deal with. He's been a big fish in a much smaller pond than he understands, and there's a whole wide world of people who aren't scared of him. Also while the Rickon stuff is indeed bigtime condensing, I think he's gonna come out of it ok. After Theon and Sansa, they can't go back to that well a third time without flipping it. And if Ghost eats Ramsay that'll be poetic canine justice.

In the books, it's made clear that Robb did not have enough time to take the whole armed strength of the North with him. He only took about half. The rest would have taken too long to assemble, and there are logistical problems feeding that many men, even at Winterfell, for the weeks and maybe months it would have taken the army to gather. There's still quite a few armed troops left.

Quote

Arya's line, "Which name would you like a girl to speak?", seems to be a recognition of the fact that the Faceless Men are going to do this list without her. That's why she only spoke 3 names; she was showing self-control.

The Faceless Men aren't interested in the list remotely, except how it impacts on Arya and her honesty. They're not heading off to kill Cersei or Gregor or anyone, unless someone else contracts them to kill them (and they probably wouldn't send Arya).

I'm betting that Arya is assigned to assassinate someone like Jon Snow or Daenerys. Given the show's questionable logic, I wonder if it's also possible that Arya is sent to kill the rulers of Astapor, Volantis or Yunkai (as was suggested might be the case in this episode).

Quote

Convenient that all the Khalasars are back. in Vaes Dothrak A dragon + a stirring speech =giant army? Or just a Dany escape for now, pursued by Khalasars to come in handy later ...

Yup (spoilers from GRRM's original draft outline for the whole series):

Spoiler

The original plan, when ASoIaF was a trilogy, was that Dany would turn right round once the dragons were born, wow the Dothraki and then invade Westeros in the second book of the series. He changed that when the series expanded and he realised he needed more for the dragons to grow and for Dany to become a ruler. So literally everything that's happened since - the Red Waste, Qarth, Slaver's Bay, Meereen - has been a side-story until Dany gets back on target.

Clearly, but he was (is) the Lord Commander of the Watch, so that in itself can't help but be significant for his end game role. He will be back.

Quote

Was anyone else disturbed by the fact that Gilly's baby is clearly 30 years old?

Do you mean 3 years old?

GoT has a big timeline discrepancy issue. In the books only 2.5 years have passed (maybe closer to 3 years by the end of ADWD), but in the TV show it's been a lot longer. Myrcella was sent to Dorne in Season 2 and spent "years" there before her death. Bran, Rickon, Arya and Sansa have all clearly grown up a lot. The best estimates in the TV show are that around 4 years have passed and it could be longer. That's actually a problem for Gilly's baby, who (having been born halfway through Season 3) should be at least 2 or 3 years old by now. I was actually relieved that they were using a clearly older child, though possibly still not old enough.

Quote

I think the passing of the torch to Edd was not just Jon being flippant, Edd is a perfect person to lead the NW going forward, and this positions the NW into the role of helping out when the time comes due to his friendship with Jon.

More to the point, he's pretty much the only named Night's Watch character left on the show who isn't dead

Quote

when Jon joins it's something like 1,000 spread across just three remaining Watch keeps (Castle Black, Eastwatch-By-The-Sea,and the Shadow Keep). It's a skeleton staff.

Yup. And those lose a lot on the Fist of the First Men, more at Craster's Keep and more in the assault on the Wall. In the books they keep better numbers, so there's still a lot left, but in the TV show it does feel like they've massacred the numbers down to not very much at all. There appear to be just a couple of dozen men left at Castle Black.

[Gabriele]

Werthead, on 09 May 2016 - 05:42 PM, said:

GoT has a big timeline discrepancy issue. In the books only 2.5 years have passed (maybe closer to 3 years by the end of ADWD), but in the TV show it's been a lot longer. Myrcella was sent to Dorne in Season 2 and spent "years" there before her death. Bran, Rickon, Arya and Sansa have all clearly grown up a lot. The best estimates in the TV show are that around 4 years have passed and it could be longer. That's actually a problem for Gilly's baby, who (having been born halfway through Season 3) should be at least 2 or 3 years old by now. I was actually relieved that they were using a clearly older child, though possibly still not old enough.

Maybe some of the characters have the time-altering version of Littlefinger's jetpack (which defies what little geography there is in the TV version). Superhormones or something.

[Terez]

I meant 30. That baby's face is creepy. He looks like he should be wearing a business suit.

[End of Disc One]

I saw a theory from a show watcher that R + L = J & M(eera) as twins. I believe the reasoning was that they look a lot alike, and you know what they do look a lot alike in the show. I'm sure this has already been brought up and debunked by book theorizers, but I wonder if D&D would go with that.

This post has been edited by End of Disc One: 09 May 2016 - 08:44 PM