TV Game of Thrones (A Song of Ice and Fire - TV Adaption)

[xi0]

We have a separate thread for House of the Dragon now, just in case people were going to watch

TV - House of The Dragon

This Thread is for discussing everything related to it.

mangahelpers.com

 

[M3J]

Oh right, and Bran could easily make Jon a Stark, although I don't know if it really works like that.

So Jon, Aegon, and Dany could all be parts of the prophecy?

 

[xi0]

Oh right, and Bran could easily make Jon a Stark, although I don't know if it really works like that.

So Jon, Aegon, and Dany could all be parts of the prophecy?

He could, but that doesn't mean Sansa would recognize him as one.

Yeah, they are. Dany's visions, The Dragon Has Three Heads, etc.

 

[Kato756]

So maybe its the fact that I thought of a small headcannon that fixes this ending, or that I have pretty much meshed Book and Show in my mind, or even the low expectations after Winter ending in one EP,

But I did like Daenerys getting crazy.

(The change is that Rhaegal dies at King´s Landing exactly as the bells toll. No need to change pretty much ANYTHING at all)

 

[kkck]

If Sansa is queen she could do whatever she wanted. Marry Harry the Heir and name their kids Starks, who knows. She could legitimize Jon too. It was passed over in the show, but that was Robb's intention when he was at war, just in case anything happened to him. It was at a point where Bran and Rickon were thought dead, and no one knew what became of Arya. He sent Maege Mormont and Galbart Glover with letters up The Neck with after mentioning this. It's one of those unresolved things still in the books, not sure what will come of it.

There's also the fact that we don't know what will happen to Rickon either. I guess he could still be killed, but it seems a bit off. The circumstances certainly won't be the same as I don't think The Battle of the Bastards will even happen in the books. As that's pretty much what replaced the showdown between Stannis and Ramsey. In the show Jon is brought back to life in a day, in the books there's no way that's happening.

--- Double Post Merged, May 31, 2019, Original Post Date: May 31, 2019 ---

You could say, oh, but Jon wouldn't be a Stark, he'd be a Targaryen. Unless he finds out and people are convinced it's true, his actual parentage wouldn't be relevant as it pertains to family lines and what not. In the show it was obvious that Jon's real identity was pushed forth as a replacement for fAegon not existing in the show. Jon's parentage will probably only be relevant as a means to fulfill prophecy, something D&D stopped caring about seasons ago.

Yeah, i suppose there is that as well. but con context's sake this is pretty much how the baratheon's became kings (married into the last daughter of an extinct line) and also the tyrels iirc. Then again it is true that sansa, unlike the females from those extinct houses, is in an actual position of power. which is kinda BS tbh considering the circumstances under which Rob and even jon became kings in the TV show. In the books as they are now it would be even more asinine that sansa became queen. sansa would have to jump into a dragon's mouth and claw her way out of its stomach with her bare hands to convince northerners to let her be queen as things stand. Which is another glaring flaw in the tv show, sansa never did anything to get enough support to become queen of the north. She barely had a role in season 8...

To me the battle of the bastards actually seems likely even if the circumstances are drastically different on account of stannis (though his army is kinda dead iirc) and the simple fact that the actual battle in the tv show was indefensibly stupid and asinine (ramsey's plan was to literally to corner john's army against a impossibly high mountain of corpses). john was pretty much headed for that before he got killed by the night watch. As for him being revived, my take would be that that has to happen soon because otherwise he'd risk ending like caitlyn who was revived after a long time. Melisandre is at the wall iirc so this should be viable. Unless the plan here is to have the cold preserve john's body or have him be half zombie.... I suppose him not getting revived at all is a possibility.

 

[xi0]

Yeah, i suppose there is that as well. but con context's sake this is pretty much how the baratheon's became kings (married into the last daughter of an extinct line) and also the tyrels iirc. Then again it is true that sansa, unlike the females from those extinct houses, is in an actual position of power. which is kinda BS tbh considering the circumstances under which Rob and even jon became kings in the TV show. In the books as they are now it would be even more asinine that sansa became queen. sansa would have to jump into a dragon's mouth and claw her way out of its stomach with her bare hands to convince northerners to let her be queen as things stand. Which is another glaring flaw in the tv show, sansa never did anything to get enough support to become queen of the north. She barely had a role in season 8...

Well, the show made the point of saying there always needed to be a Stark in Winterfell. And since Jon became King without being legitimized and then bent the knee to Dany, Sansa became the Lady of Winterfell.... why exactly I'm not sure I guess. It's not really clear how or why Sansa would go North unless she's already married. Littlefinger's entire plan is marrying her to Harold Hardyng, the heir to the Eyrie after Sweetrobin and taking back Winterfell at some point. If that happens, Sansa will already be married, so I don't think she'd have a claim to Winterfell while Bran or Rickon is around.

To me the battle of the bastards actually seems likely even if the circumstances are drastically different on account of stannis (though his army is kinda dead iirc) and the simple fact that the actual battle in the tv show was indefensibly stupid and asinine (ramsey's plan was to literally to corner john's army against a impossibly high mountain of corpses). john was pretty much headed for that before he got killed by the night watch. As for him being revived, my take would be that that has to happen soon because otherwise he'd risk ending like caitlyn who was revived after a long time. Melisandre is at the wall iirc so this should be viable. Unless the plan here is to have the cold preserve john's body or have him be half zombie.... I suppose him not getting revived at all is a possibility.

I don't think so honestly. There's a reason why Jon's last thoughts are of Ghost as he dies. He's going to live in Ghost for the time being at least. The prologue of ADwD with Varamyr makes a point to explain how skinchanging works, and what happens to them when they die, and how they can have a second life in one of their animals. They also make a point of showing Jon keeping dead bodies under The Wall in the ice cells to see if they become wights or not. It's clear that The Wall has magical properties beyond just preventing The Others from crossing it. Neither of these things are coincidences and will most likely directly tie into Jon's story in the next two books IMO.

I've seen people theorize that Bran does become king, because he's taken over Jon's body for some reason. It's a bit convoluted but Bran becoming king makes more sense if he's actually inside Jon's body. And so does Jon going back North if he's actually inside Ghost's body.

 

[Franz]

Something which I'd note hasn't been all that much discussed is that the GOT finale basically shows the end of the stark line. As in, starks are pretty much extinct. If sansa is crowned queen then her kids will not be starks, they will belong to whichever other line. Specially considering that john, the last potential legitimate stark, went of to live as a wildling for a whole bunch of indefensibly stupid reasons. So.... there's that.

Well if Sansa takes a minor lord as her husband she may very well pass the name Stark to her children.

 

[Copy Panda]

I think the Starks got a fairly good deal. For this generation, they control Westeros, and their bloodline need not perish

 

[Rikudou King]

I highly doubt Bran will become king in the books. The whole narrative is that feudalism is bad, so it would be quite weird for GRRM to end the series with it still in place.

 

[kkck]

I highly doubt Bran will become king in the books. The whole narrative is that feudalism is bad, so it would be quite weird for GRRM to end the series with it still in place.

I think the narrative about feudalism being bad is more present in the tv show than in the books. As far as the books go the narrative is more along the lines that they are all just people struggling to survive in their time and cultural context. I mean, barely anyone objects to the actual system. Which makes sense because most characters tend to have benefited from it in some form or at some time. And the implication so far is that non lords care little about the game of thrones other than what that means regarding how full their pots are or war.

 

[Static]

I highly doubt Bran will become king in the books. The whole narrative is that feudalism is bad, so it would be quite weird for GRRM to end the series with it still in place.

It's already confirmed by the actor.

Spoiler

 

[M3J]

He could, but that doesn't mean Sansa would recognize him as one.

Yeah, they are. Dany's visions, The Dragon Has Three Heads, etc.

Why not? Didn't she say he's a Stark, or are you talking about le novels?

Ah, I think so as well. But to fight the Others?

 

[xi0]

I highly doubt Bran will become king in the books. The whole narrative is that feudalism is bad, so it would be quite weird for GRRM to end the series with it still in place.

I think it's pretty much confirmed to be happening. There's a lot of foreshadowing regarding Bran and his role in the story as well, but honestly I don't remember too many theories about this. Especially since I personally didn't see a way for him to ever leave the weirwood cave.

I will say though, Bran may become ruler or King, but there is no Iron Throne. ASOIAF is plainly anti-war and mostly anti-feudalism, but there is something different about a ruler being chosen instead of simply inheriting their power. Unless Jon is in the picture somehow and his Targaryen lineage is acknowledged, Bran would have no claim to the throne. If he ends up ruling it'll be because he's chosen to do so for some reason.

...or it'll be one of those out-there theories that I mentioned with Bran actually ruling as Jon.

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 1, 2019, Original Post Date: Jun 1, 2019 ---

Why not? Didn't she say he's a Stark, or are you talking about le novels?

Ah, I think so as well. But to fight the Others?

No, because Bran has no power over the North. If Bran legitimizes someone, Sansa doesn't need to recognize it at all.

The Dragon Has Three Heads is a specific Targaryen prophecy. Dany hears her brother Rhaegar say it during a vision in The House of Undying in Qarth (one of the things not shown in the show). Most likely in reference to Aegon and his sisters. It's why the Targaryen sigil is a three-headed dragon. It could have a lot of different meanings. But at this point the most popular idea is that it's Dany, Aegon, and Jon. Some others people bring up is Bran or Tyrion. We're not sure if they have to be Targaryen, or if they'll be dragonriders.... we don't really know. But it's an important part of The Prince That Was Promised.

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 1, 2019 ---

This was such an amazing breakdown of one of the major gripes I had with the show concerning the whitewashing of Tyrion and his relationship with his family. Also one of the earliest signs that D&D's interpretation of the story was severely lacking. As good as Dinklage was in the show, he could have been SO much better if they stayed faithful to his book story.

 

[Rikudou King]

I think the narrative about feudalism being bad is more present in the tv show than in the books. As far as the books go the narrative is more along the lines that they are all just people struggling to survive in their time and cultural context. I mean, barely anyone objects to the actual system. Which makes sense because most characters tend to have benefited from it in some form or at some time. And the implication so far is that non lords care little about the game of thrones other than what that means regarding how full their pots are or war.

Well the show was more heavy-handed in it then the books, like most things, but the books definitely went out of their way to show how terrible the system was. And between the rise of the Sparrows, Dorne's ambitions, Daenerys' libations, and the coming of the Free Folk, the old system is clearly gonna get turnt on it's head.

It's already confirmed by the actor.

Spoiler

Considering the way they treated other things in the series, I would hardly call something D&D said as confirmed. But even taking that as truth, Bran becoming a king, and Bran becoming the king of Westeros are two completely different situations. Bran, being the oldest living male Stark, could easily become King of the North just by returning, especially since most of the Stark's enemies are being wiped out or in a losing position currently. But unlike the show, the books have been clear on how secession to the Iron Throne works, and there are far to many contenders for the throne for Bran to claim it. Could it happen, sure in an incredibly slight chance GRRM could have everyone with a claim or who would object killed, but that seems like it would really be pushing it. But more to the point, the issue wouldn't simply be Bran taking the throne, but also keeping it. While the show handwaves it away in the later seasons, we saw what happens when a weak king takes the throne, the other kingdoms split. Cersei had an army and even she couldn't keep control of more then a few kingdoms, Bran doesn't even have that.

I think it's pretty much confirmed to be happening. There's a lot of foreshadowing regarding Bran and his role in the story as well, but honestly I don't remember too many theories about this. Especially since I personally didn't see a way for him to ever leave the weirwood cave.

I will say though, Bran may become ruler or King, but there is no Iron Throne. ASOIAF is plainly anti-war and mostly anti-feudalism, but there is something different about a ruler being chosen instead of simply inheriting their power. Unless Jon is in the picture somehow and his Targaryen lineage is acknowledged, Bran would have no claim to the throne. If he ends up ruling it'll be because he's chosen to do so for some reason.

...or it'll be one of those out-there theories that I mentioned with Bran actually ruling as Jon.

Well I don't doubt Bran becoming the northern king, since at this point plenty of characters seem to suspect or know that Theon didn't actually kill Bran or Rickon, with some already searching for them, so that wouldn't be a huge leap. And with the idea that the war between men and the Others is being pushed by the Children, I could see them making use of Bran to get to the other side of the Wall.

I don't even thing that would work. Jon being revealed as a Targaryen, and Rhaegar basically abandoning his wife for Lyanna is gonna piss off an already pissed off Dorne. There's no way they would allow Jon to become king, especially if Aegon is around. Even if he really is a Blackfire, I think they would side with him over Jon just because of the injustice of the situation. Of course, if the Children are behind events, then them manipulating people's minds could easily allow such things to happen.

 

[xi0]

But unlike the show, the books have been clear on how secession to the Iron Throne works, and there are far to many contenders for the throne for Bran to claim it.

There are far too many contenders for the throne now. If Jon is accepted as a Targaryen, and Dany, Aegon, or Stannis are no longer in the picture, Bran would be Jon's heir, as his oldest living male relative. And if it's something like the show it won't matter either way if he's chosen for some reason

Well I don't doubt Bran becoming the northern king, since at this point plenty of characters seem to suspect or know that Theon didn't actually kill Bran or Rickon, with some already searching for them, so that wouldn't be a huge leap. And with the idea that the war between men and the Others is being pushed by the Children, I could see them making use of Bran to get to the other side of the Wall.

I don't even thing that would work. Jon being revealed as a Targaryen, and Rhaegar basically abandoning his wife for Lyanna is gonna piss off an already pissed off Dorne. There's no way they would allow Jon to become king, especially if Aegon is around. Even if he really is a Blackfire, I think they would side with him over Jon just because of the injustice of the situation. Of course, if the Children are behind events, then them manipulating people's minds could easily allow such things to happen.

I don't think it's being pushed by the Children, their existence might be their fault but I don't expect them to be allied with them. They're an out of control Frankenstein's monster.

Northern King if that's even a thing. Remember, there is no King in the North after Robb's death. Jon is dead for now. The North becoming independent doesn't even make sense in the show, and I'm not sure how it could be made to make sense in the books if Bran is king. If Jon is king it still makes no sense to me either.

Don't know how much say Dorne would have, I'm expecting Dany to take out Aegon most likely. If Dany dies, who would Dorne support over Jon? There isn't anyone. If Aegon is an impostor, Dorne would not support him IMO. Doran is so willing to support fAegon over Dany because he thinks he is his nephew.

 

[gnut]

Haven't been around and didn't read posts but all I GoT to say...
Such a disappointment........

 

[xi0]

Haven't been around and didn't read posts but all I GoT to say...
Such a disappointment........

It's been a disappointment for many seasons now. For some reason people were still holding out hope. Even I was a bit delusional after the first two episodes lol.

 

[kkck]

Well the show was more heavy-handed in it then the books, like most things, but the books definitely went out of their way to show how terrible the system was. And between the rise of the Sparrows, Dorne's ambitions, Daenerys' libations, and the coming of the Free Folk, the old system is clearly gonna get turnt on it's head.

Well I don't doubt Bran becoming the northern king, since at this point plenty of characters seem to suspect or know that Theon didn't actually kill Bran or Rickon, with some already searching for them, so that wouldn't be a huge leap. And with the idea that the war between men and the Others is being pushed by the Children, I could see them making use of Bran to get to the other side of the Wall.

I don't even thing that would work. Jon being revealed as a Targaryen, and Rhaegar basically abandoning his wife for Lyanna is gonna piss off an already pissed off Dorne. There's no way they would allow Jon to become king, especially if Aegon is around. Even if he really is a Blackfire, I think they would side with him over Jon just because of the injustice of the situation. Of course, if the Children are behind events, then them manipulating people's minds could easily allow such things to happen.

Yeah but here is the thing: Game of thrones characters have a thing were they are all almost surprisingly knowledgeable about westeros' history. As in, an uncanny number of times you can see characters contextualizing stuff which is happening now by explaining something that has happened in the past. And from that we learn an important thing: That westeros has had more or less its current political dynamic for thousands of years (even if we assume noble houses fudge history to their convenience). Certainly the iron throne is relatively new (300 years) but that doesn't change how static their culture appears to be in general. So to me it seems like a pretty big jump to say this minuscule, but important, point in time in westeros history is specifically where the political system gets turned on its head. Overall, events just as important as what we are seeing now happened 300 years ago when aegon took over. And equally important events happened a number of times over the roughly 8000 years of westeros history that we have some knowledge of.

That's a good point, what rheagar did does sound like something that would substantially strain the kingdom's relationship with dorne. if not straight up ruin a relationship that is hundreds of years old. I suppose the question then would be whether jon can get enough people outside the north who aren't dornish so as to maintain his claim.

 

[xi0]

I'm not really understanding the point about straining relationships with Dorne. Everyone already knew Rhaegar and Lyanna were a thing. What would particulars really matter? It would only matter if all three heads of the dragon are around and there's zero chance that will last for long. If Doran held such a grudge, why would he wish to support Dany when her brother betrayed Elia Martell? The same logic sort of applies there, you see? The point is Doran wants Targaryens back in power as revenge against the Lannisters.

 

[kkck]

I'm not really understanding the point about straining relationships with Dorne. Everyone already knew Rhaegar and Lyanna were a thing. What would particulars really matter? It would only matter if all three heads of the dragon are around and there's zero chance that will last for long. If Doran held such a grudge, why would he wish to support Dany when her brother betrayed Elia Martell? The same logic sort of applies there, you see? The point is Doran wants Targaryens back in power as revenge against the Lannisters.

I don't think people knew the extent to which rheagan and lyana were a thing though. He made her queen of beauty or something but that is as far as things go regarding whether people knew anything. It's not a confirmation that rheagar straight up abandoned his marriage or anything. Marriages in the series don't even have to be about love, they are power plays. But if it became publicly known that rheagar had a marriage annulled and then immediately married someone else then that IMO should open up a pretty big can of worms. It's not just a betrayal to the relationship the two families had enjoyed for a couple hundred years since they finally became the seven kingdoms, it's the very public humiliation to their dead relative. And we know that for dornish nobility the loss of elia is still a pretty fresh wound (that just keeps on giving....). The way I see it cercei would have to do something absolutely abhorrent for the martels to support jon's claim while knowing he is the product of rheagar betraying them.

 

[xi0]

I don't think people knew the extent to which rheagan and lyana were a thing though. He made her queen of beauty or something but that is as far as things go regarding whether people knew anything. It's not a confirmation that rheagar straight up abandoned his marriage or anything. Marriages in the series don't even have to be about love, they are power plays. But if it became publicly known that rheagar had a marriage annulled and then immediately married someone else then that IMO should open up a pretty big can of worms. It's not just a betrayal to the relationship the two families had enjoyed for a couple hundred years since they finally became the seven kingdoms, it's the very public humiliation to their dead relative. And we know that for dornish nobility the loss of elia is still a pretty fresh wound (that just keeps on giving....). The way I see it cercei would have to do something absolutely abhorrent for the martels to support jon's claim while knowing he is the product of rheagar betraying them.

No, people know Rhaegar "kidnapped" her. That's THE event that triggered Robert's Rebellion. Brandon Stark, Rickard Stark, Jon Arryn's heir, as well as members of House Royce and Mallister were put to death by Aerys II after they came looking for answers concerning Rhaegar's actions. Then he demanded Jon Arryn to kill Ned and Robert (they were his wards) as well and he refused, declaring war on the crown by calling his banners.

I understand your point, but that doesn't explain them supporting Dany either, as he's sister to the man who "betrayed" them. The reality is Doran isn't some hotheaded vengeful moron, he knows who killed his daughter and her children and he wants them dead. He's waited years to do it. He has no real affection for Targaryens as people.

And I have to strongly disagree, they would support literally anyone before a Lannister. I don't really see it as them picking between Aegon, Dany, or Jon. I don't think they'll all be in competition at the same time. Cersei will likely have to flee or be killed when Aegon conquers the Iron Throne. How Dany and Jon figure into that later I'm not really sure. If we go by the show, King's Landing will burn and both Aegon and Dany will most likely die.