[QuickTidal]

Terez, on 24 May 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

Bran may be inexperienced, but he's not stupid; he will have realized that what he did to Hodor had already happened and extrapolated from that. You think it's believable that 1) he's too stupid to have figured that out, and 2) he would make his appeal to Aerys of all people. I don't think that's believable at all.

Bran can affect things in the past. That's not the same thing as changing the past at all.

Of course he knows what happened to Hodor and that he caused it. And I never said he's stupid. I said that with his powers he may believe he can affect things anyways. He called out to his father in the ToJ scene, and was heard. No harm or foul there. So why is it so far-fetched that he might feel like he could change things? What is the point of giving him these powers if all he can do is watch? From a storytelling standpoint you make Bran learn to try to be more powerful, and master those gifts. I think Bran might be BRASH enough to try to change things. Would he automatically connect what he is attempting with Aerys being crazy? I don't see why when he has two instances of this, and one in which nothing untoward occurred (Ned only heard whispers....and what did the Mad king hear? Whispers) and another in which something awful occurred (Hodor) makes it unbelievable.

Cause, on 24 May 2016 - 03:52 PM, said:

Except its also established that the targaryans are prone to madness because of generations of inbreeding. Aerys is by no means unique in being crazy. So Im not sure I like the idea that Bran made him crazy. The Targs also have a long history with fire as well.

Except that Aerys rule was unmarred by madness of any kind till the last few years. He is actively described as benevolent in most of his reign. I can see what you are saying, but it certainly doesn't wipe the theory off the table.

[Terez]

QuickTidal, on 24 May 2016 - 04:08 PM, said:

Terez, on 24 May 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

Bran may be inexperienced, but he's not stupid; he will have realized that what he did to Hodor had already happened and extrapolated from that. You think it's believable that 1) he's too stupid to have figured that out, and 2) he would make his appeal to Aerys of all people. I don't think that's believable at all.

Bran can affect things in the past. That's not the same thing as changing the past at all.

Of course he knows what happened to Hodor and that he caused it. And I never said he's stupid. I said that with his powers he may believe he can affect things anyways. He called out to his father in the ToJ scene, and was heard. No harm or foul there. So why is it so far-fetched that he might feel like he could change things?

As the 3ER said, Ned heard only the wind. I could see why Bran could still believe after that admonition that he could change the past....but not after Hodor. That is where he learned the lesson.

[QuickTidal]

Terez, on 24 May 2016 - 04:11 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 24 May 2016 - 04:08 PM, said:

Terez, on 24 May 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

Bran may be inexperienced, but he's not stupid; he will have realized that what he did to Hodor had already happened and extrapolated from that. You think it's believable that 1) he's too stupid to have figured that out, and 2) he would make his appeal to Aerys of all people. I don't think that's believable at all.

Bran can affect things in the past. That's not the same thing as changing the past at all.

Of course he knows what happened to Hodor and that he caused it. And I never said he's stupid. I said that with his powers he may believe he can affect things anyways. He called out to his father in the ToJ scene, and was heard. No harm or foul there. So why is it so far-fetched that he might feel like he could change things?

As the 3ER said, Ned heard only the wind. I could see why Bran could still believe after that admonition that he could change the past....but not after Hodor. That is where he learned the lesson.

So (a specific) accidental failure means he should stop attempting to do anything?


That's dumb. If others on the show followed that logic then nothing would have occurred as it has. People make mistakes, and on GoT sometimes they are DRASTIC, horrible mistakes. But those people almost always keep trying to do the thing they feel is right in the end. If not, everyone would stagnate. If anything, the Hodor revelation should steel Bran's resolve to do things right.

The Hodor issue is actually an anomaly due to the events taking place at that time. Nothing about it should show Bran that what he's doing it bad in general, but that Warging AND Greenseeing at the same time was a bad idea in this instance.

Remember the other point. That Bran was PHYSICALLY there when he saw the Night King and his army of wights. This is how the NK touched him and marked him. So while Ned and his pals, or anyone else in the Winterfell scene didn't SEE him....he WAS there nonetheless. It's just that the NK has powers which must allow him to see Bran. This means he's not just seeing into the past (or the present, not sure if that NK scene was the present or past) but going there somehow as well. That's a distinct point when it comes to what Bran can an can't accomplish in his powers.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 24 May 2016 - 04:37 PM

[Terez]

QuickTidal, on 24 May 2016 - 04:36 PM, said:

Terez, on 24 May 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

Bran may be inexperienced, but he's not stupid; he will have realized that what he did to Hodor had already happened and extrapolated from that. You think it's believable that 1) he's too stupid to have figured that out, and 2) he would make his appeal to Aerys of all people. I don't think that's believable at all.

Bran can affect things in the past. That's not the same thing as changing the past at all.

So (a specific) accidental failure means he should stop attempting to do anything?

Yes, because the accident demonstrated the mechanics to him (and to us) very clearly.

[QuickTidal]

Terez, on 24 May 2016 - 04:40 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 24 May 2016 - 04:36 PM, said:

Terez, on 24 May 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

Bran may be inexperienced, but he's not stupid; he will have realized that what he did to Hodor had already happened and extrapolated from that. You think it's believable that 1) he's too stupid to have figured that out, and 2) he would make his appeal to Aerys of all people. I don't think that's believable at all.

Bran can affect things in the past. That's not the same thing as changing the past at all.

So (a specific) accidental failure means he should stop attempting to do anything?

Yes, because the accident demonstrated the mechanics to him (and to us) very clearly.

No, again, it doesn't. It does this ONLY because Hodor is present in both time periods. It creates a VERY specific situation that can only occur because Bran is the "constant" in both time periods to one character. The accident occurs as a result of Bran greenseeing AND warging at the same time with a character who is present in two forms.

The Mad King is long dead, and nothing prevents Bran from thinking he can affect things differently. No in-show reason for an accident like the one with Hodor to re-occur without those same set of variables ALL in place, especially when the other instance he's affected the past didn't do anything untoward...again, because Ned is dead and not present with present Bran to affect in both eras...

So no, I'm sorry I don't think that this should deter Bran in any way. It should make him CAUTIOUS, but it should not stop him.

[Nevyn]

QuickTidal, on 24 May 2016 - 04:08 PM, said:

Cause, on 24 May 2016 - 03:52 PM, said:

Except its also established that the targaryans are prone to madness because of generations of inbreeding. Aerys is by no means unique in being crazy. So Im not sure I like the idea that Bran made him crazy. The Targs also have a long history with fire as well.

Except that Aerys rule was unmarred by madness of any kind till the last few years. He is actively described as benevolent in most of his reign. I can see what you are saying, but it certainly doesn't wipe the theory off the table.

Aerys is always odd and off, and never a good ruler. He has Tywin for his early reign and Tywin keeps things under control. Aerys goes mad after being held hostage, and after the breakup with Tywin. Its not something that needs an explanation, it has been explained sufficiently.

Moreover, what would Bran try to say to him? 3 words were enough to drive Hodor round the bend. Is Bran really going to try to pass back a complicated message.

But more than all of that, you know it won't happen in the show (ignoring the bigger reason that overreliance on time paradoxes is weak) is that it would simply take too much time for little gain. Think about how this is all rendered on screen. Bloodraven has been there as a guide to Bran, but also as a foil for conversation about what is being observed. Sets up the scene for the audience. If Bran goes back to Aerys' day, how do we establish that he is seeing young Aerys? Does Bran just talk to himself as he figures all this out? And how many seperate flash backs would you need to establish Bran seeing the opportunity, Bran going back, Bran communicating with the mad king, and the resulting effects? If would be a giant, confusing diversion that the story in no way needs.

Bran's flashes are very likely to stay around his father and aunt.

[QuickTidal]

Nevyn, on 24 May 2016 - 04:49 PM, said:

Moreover, what would Bran try to say to him? 3 words were enough to drive Hodor round the bend. Is Bran really going to try to pass back a complicated message.

See my post above. Hodor only happens because past and present Hodor become linked through Bran. It's not an event that can occur easily or often. And it certainly can't occur when there is no present Mad King to be linked to past Mad King.

But at this point everyone thinks I'm REALLY wrong for having a theory...so whatever. That's fine, but I don't think they establish his powers for him to just be voyeristically watching his dead family members and what? Discussing those visions with Meera?

How boring.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 24 May 2016 - 05:00 PM

[Terez]

Most people seemed to think, before the Hodor thing, that Bran's main purpose would be to guide Jon especially to an understanding of his role in the battle to come. That's why the 3ER told Bran he needed to know everything. He has to understand the history of the world to help guide the people who have the power to do something about the White Walkers.

[QuickTidal]

I'm not most people.

And I don't think you introduce time manipulation twice to just ignore it.

[Terez]

Attempted time manipulation. It wasn't introduced to be ignored. It was introduced because, with all Bran's trips to the past to gain knowledge, it was inevitable that he'd be tempted to change the past. They had to establish that it was impossible.

[QuickTidal]

Terez, on 24 May 2016 - 05:19 PM, said:

They had to establish that it was impossible.

Not worth it.

Go ahead an believe what you will. I can't be bothered reexplaining it over and over.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 24 May 2016 - 05:44 PM

[Khellendros]

QuickTidal, on 24 May 2016 - 04:08 PM, said:

Except that Aerys rule was unmarred by madness of any kind till the last few years. He is actively described as benevolent in most of his reign. I can see what you are saying, but it certainly doesn't wipe the theory off the table.

The French king Charles VI was born in 1368. He became king in 1380. He was known as Charles the Beloved for his generally sensible rule and efforts at reforming the government. Right up until 1392, when he suddenly suffered a psychotic episode and killed several people and almost killed his brother. He eventually recovered from this episode, but would suffer from recurrent and frequent bouts up until he died in 1422. His madness caused the kingdom to dissolve into severe instability, in a period which is now often regarded as one of the lowest points in French history.

As far as we know, no time travel was involved




Edit: That's not me saying your theory is definitively wrong, it could of course be exactly what happens. I'm just saying that sometimes, shit just happens.

This post has been edited by Khellendros: 24 May 2016 - 06:09 PM

[Abyss]

Khellendros, on 24 May 2016 - 06:07 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 24 May 2016 - 04:08 PM, said:

Except that Aerys rule was unmarred by madness of any kind till the last few years. He is actively described as benevolent in most of his reign. I can see what you are saying, but it certainly doesn't wipe the theory off the table.

The French king Charles VI was born in 1368. He became king in 1380. He was known as Charles the Beloved for his generally sensible rule and efforts at reforming the government. Right up until 1392, when he suddenly suffered a psychotic episode and killed several people and almost killed his brother. He eventually recovered from this episode, but would suffer from recurrent and frequent bouts up until he died in 1422. His madness caused the kingdom to dissolve into severe instability, in a period which is now often regarded as one of the lowest points in French history.

As far as we know, no time travel was involved

STOP LOOKING AT ME!

[Gorefest]

QuickTidal, on 24 May 2016 - 04:59 PM, said:

See my post above. Hodor only happens because past and present Hodor become linked through Bran. It's not an event that can occur easily or often. And it certainly can't occur when there is no present Mad King to be linked to past Mad King.

But even if Bran would be responsible for Aerys II going mad, so what? It has no effect on the overall storyline, so why even bother introducing it? It would be different if we learnt a few books or series ago that Aerys II towards the end of his reign suddenly got a bunch of troops together for no apparent reason and marched off north to kill a bunch of wights and during this he left an important item at the Wall that the Night's Watch can now use to kill the Others. That would have storyline implications.

Finding out that it was Bran that made Aerys mad doesn't do anything for the story whatsoever. At the very most it is a brief 'ah, cool, so that's what happened' flash. But it doesn't serve any purpose in the overall story. It's an issue I have with a lot of these fan theories or wishes, like Cleganebowl. It's all very cute but it doesn't really matter in the bigger scheme of things. I think the hassle of trying to introduce the character of Aerys to a tv audience for what will probably just be a relatively short scene without any implications is just a waste of screen time.

This post has been edited by Gorefest: 24 May 2016 - 07:35 PM

[QuickTidal]

Remind me never to post a theory in this thread again.

[Terez]

Nevyn, on 24 May 2016 - 04:49 PM, said:

But more than all of that, you know it won't happen in the show (ignoring the bigger reason that overreliance on time paradoxes is weak) is that it would simply take too much time for little gain. Think about how this is all rendered on screen. Bloodraven has been there as a guide to Bran, but also as a foil for conversation about what is being observed. Sets up the scene for the audience. If Bran goes back to Aerys' day, how do we establish that he is seeing young Aerys? Does Bran just talk to himself as he figures all this out? And how many seperate flash backs would you need to establish Bran seeing the opportunity, Bran going back, Bran communicating with the mad king, and the resulting effects? If would be a giant, confusing diversion that the story in no way needs.

Bran's flashes are very likely to stay around his father and aunt.

I am obviously inclined to agree that the show isn't likely to go down the voices-in-Aerys's-ear route because it seems like a pointless diversion. But there is one prominent family scene where Bran might end up with Aerys: the scene where his uncle and grandfather are killed.

So maybe they decide to go the whispering route with a montage, and Bran ends up being partly responsible for their deaths by somehow (!) creating a conduit for Aerys to hear what's happening in the present (this presumably after previous montage scenes with the same phenomenon), which is presumably Meera and Bran being attacked by wights. It just seems like overkill to me, unless that's what this whole story is about--Bran trying to play god and screwing it up over and over again until he gets it right and learns how to positively affect events in the present/future instead of events that have already happened. He becomes the new god of the North, having just caused the death of the old god. Very Druidic.

I can buy that. Happy QT? It's good because Bran is the first non-prologue/epilogue POV character. He's the chosen one of this story. The Broken Man (ep 7) could definitely be a reference to Bran the Broken. I'm interested to see how far he broke himself with the Hodor incident, and how he will recover.

Speaking of chosen ones, WoT spoilers:

Spoiler

This path for Bran reminds me a little of Rand vs the Dark One.

(!) As to the somehow, maybe Bran learns (by being stuck in warg mode?) how to warg into fire, and the fire is like Hodor, existing in the past where his mind is and the present where his body is. Or maybe Aerys was all Brynden; he's the Targaryen here, so why not? But maybe it was Bran.

Quote

-- "The time has come."
-- "The time for what?"
-- "For you to become me."
-- "But.... am I ready?"
-- "....No."

Another possible route here is for Bran to avoid making the same mistakes that Brynden made, and learn how to see without affecting (saving all his affecting for the real world) because it's too easy to make mistakes which have disastrous consequences, and then you have to live with the guilt even though you know it had already happened before you did anything. But that in itself seems pointless. Maybe he'll just be stuck in warg mode indefinitely, and this is how all that knowledge gets 'uploaded' to his brain, just an endless montage of Bran accidentally causing historical events until he figures out how to do something useful.

[worry]

LOL. Who could have predicted nerds on the Internet splitting hairs on theory details down to the atomic level, because they're mostly saying the same thing, and people getting mad about it?

To get back to the meat of the show, though, my theory is that Littlefinger actually morphs into a mockingbird and that's how he gets around so fast.

[Terez]

worry, on 24 May 2016 - 08:07 PM, said:

LOL. Who could have predicted nerds on the Internet splitting hairs on theory details down to the atomic level, because they're mostly saying the same thing, and people getting mad about it?

You would have loved our epic Lews Therin debates on Theoryland. /s

[Traveller]

Quote

(!) As to the somehow, maybe Bran learns (by being stuck in warg mode?) how to warg into fire, and the fire is like Hodor, existing in the past where his mind is and the present where his body is.

And maybe while he wargs into the fire, he learns to look out of fires and talk to priestesses and send them visions... oh hang on.

This post has been edited by Traveller: 24 May 2016 - 08:54 PM

[Terez]

Traveller, on 24 May 2016 - 08:53 PM, said:

Quote

(!) As to the somehow, maybe Bran learns (by being stuck in warg mode?) how to warg into fire, and the fire is like Hodor, existing in the past where his mind is and the present where his body is.

And maybe while he wargs into the fire, he learns to look out of fires and talk to priestesses and... oh hang on.

Yeah, that's the gist. In the case of Varys I'd be more inclined to believe it was the 3ER because he had more time on his hands. But maybe this divergence explains why Melisandre's visions told her at one point that Stannis was her guy and later that Jon Snow was her guy. Maybe Stannis was the 3ER and Jon was Bran. Maybe the 3ER had his eyes on Stannis because Stannis knew the truth about Robert's heirs, and who knows how the details got confused. Or maybe Bran did, because that particular detail is tied to the start of his journey. Or maybe that's a bullshit line of thinking because we still have other forms of red magic to contend with like shadow babies and resurrections. I can see the greengods being behind the resurrections, but the shadow babies? Maybe the priests and priestesses of R'hllor mix their magic.

Briar King, on 24 May 2016 - 08:53 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 24 May 2016 - 07:40 PM, said:

Remind me never to post a theory in this thread again.

Fuck that. Post em and lol at the responses and if your right you can gloat away.

On my Jon Stark theory. I thought I was going to get to gloat this week. It came closer this Ep then any this season.

On "After the Thrones", one of the guys was talking about how Sansa's worldview is basically Stark Exceptionalism, which I thought was apt. He also pointed out that Jon didn't seem to share that view, and that's true too. In the scene with Davos in this last episode, Jon looked like he wanted to burst her bubble, but Davos did it so he didn't have to. I don't think he came any closer to being Jon Stark; if anything, it was emphasized more and more that he's not a Stark and never has been. All Sansa did when she compared him to Ramsey was insult him. No, I think the Targaryen reveal is coming soon and that will override any questions about whether he's a Stark.