Jump to content

Iron from Ice discussion (spoilers)


shmewdog

Recommended Posts

Oh, please. There are no rules and never have been any. Martin has always gone with 'plot convenience' over realism. Always. The rules are bent and broken so often that there's really none to speak of. So I don't bother even trying to define them. Trying to work out the timeline is pointless, because nothing will line up. Trying to explain why someone survived something is useless- the only rule there is "They die when the author needs them to and live when the author needs them to". Arya should have died from the blow to the back of the head, but she didn't. Tyrion should have died from drowning, but he didn't. Dany should have died from the pyre, but she didn't. Bran should have died from the fall, but he didn't.

None of the examples you cite are as ludicrous as Rodrik surviving without food or water for weeks/months except for Dany walking into the flames and surviving, which isn't an issue because it's an example of the series abiding by its own rules about magic. I'm pretty sure the writers don't want to go with 'Rodrik survived because a wizard did it.'

I'm not saying people can't dislike it. It is absurd. But so is the series it's based on. Blasting the game for doing it while saying that the books don't do it is nonsense. I don't expect realism and never did. Rodrik survives because the plot calls for it- just like everyone else in the series. Ethan died for the same reason. This series has the 'illusion' of realism more than it really has it.

Your mistake is that you're assuming the moment the series does something slightly unrealistic, everything goes and the reader should take anything thereafter without any loss of suspension of disbelief. That's not how it works in any fantasy series, let alone a relatively low magic one. The writer lays some groundwork for how the world works through the course of the series: SoIaF and LotR, for example, both make it clear very early on that while there are magical elements and things that would be wildly unrealistic in the real world, magic is not such an obtrusive element in these worlds that we'll spend the rest of the series watching Gandalf or Melisanndre throw fireballs or level continents with their power.

GRRM has established, over the course of SoIaF, a feel that 'things operate as they do in our world unless otherwise noted.' Which is to say, yes, there are direwolves and Others and 600 foot walls of ice that aren't at all realistic, but if Jaime Lannister single handedly wipes out an enemy army with an energy blast from his eyes, people would have a right to be really put off by it. After all, the series has made it relatively clear up till now that wars and battles are largely fought in the way they were in the real middle ages, and we shouldn't expect knights to come riding in on griffins or a horde of orcs to suddenly come bursting out of the Wolfswood with machine guns.

All of this is a long-winded way of saying that readers have every right to expect that if a character doesn't eat or drink for weeks/months, he's gonna die, and if he doesn't they have a right to either roll their eyes or feel like they deserve a good explanation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of the examples you cite are as ludicrous as Rodrik surviving without food or water for weeks/months except for Dany walking into the flames and surviving, which isn't an issue because it's an example of the series abiding by its own rules about magic. I'm pretty sure the writers don't want to go with 'Rodrik survived because a wizard did it.'

Your mistake is that you're assuming the moment the series does something slightly unrealistic, everything goes and the reader should take anything thereafter without any loss of suspension of disbelief. That's not how it works in any fantasy series, let alone a relatively low magic one. The writer lays some groundwork for how the world works through the course of the series: SoIaF and LotR, for example, both make it clear very early on that while there are magical elements and things that would be wildly unrealistic in the real world, magic is not such an obtrusive element in these worlds that we'll spend the rest of the series watching Gandalf or Melisanndre throw fireballs or level continents with their power.

GRRM has established, over the course of SoIaF, a feel that 'things operate as they do in our world unless otherwise noted.' Which is to say, yes, there are direwolves and Others and 600 foot walls of ice that aren't at all realistic, but if Jaime Lannister single handedly wipes out an enemy army with an energy blast from his eyes, people would have a right to be really put off by it. After all, the series has made it relatively clear up till now that wars and battles are largely fought in the way they were in the real middle ages, and we shouldn't expect knights to come riding in on griffins or a horde of orcs to suddenly come bursting out of the Wolfswood with machine guns.

All of this is a long-winded way of saying that readers have every right to expect that if a character doesn't eat or drink for weeks/months, he's gonna die, and if he doesn't they have a right to either roll their eyes or feel like they deserve a good explanation.

We don't know what happened to Rodrik most of that trip because we don't see it. There are plenty of things that could have happened to keep him alive.

And it's BS to say that the books are more believable or realistic. They aren't. At all. I like them, but you really have to suspend disbelief at some points. Here's my bar: Could I see Martin writing this scenario? Yes, I can. I could totally see him do it. Obviously he'd fill in the blanks, but the game isn't going to show all that because it has to keep moving. But there are plenty of ways that Rodrik could have survived. We don't have to see it to believe it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't know what happened to Rodrik most of that trip because we don't see it. There are plenty of things that could have happened to keep him alive.

And it's BS to say that the books are more believable or realistic. They aren't. At all. I like them, but you really have to suspend disbelief at some points. Here's my bar: Could I see Martin writing this scenario? Yes, I can. I could totally see him do it. Obviously he'd fill in the blanks, but the game isn't going to show all that because it has to keep moving. But there are plenty of ways that Rodrik could have survived. We don't have to see it to believe it.

We see Rodrik go in and out of conscience. Assuming they've downsized the map so it's only two weeks, he would still have died of thirst.

Really, this only work if it's a few days or if the guy pulling the cart knew he was alive and tried to assist him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We see Rodrik go in and out of conscience. Assuming they've downsized the map so it's only two weeks, he would still have died of thirst.

Really, this only work if it's a few days or if the guy pulling the cart knew he was alive and tried to assist him.

He goes in and out of consciousness. We obviously miss a big chunk of time. You could easily make up some story to cover how he survived- but I completely understand why the video game would gloss over that because it's not terribly exciting (and really, I have to wish to see a repeat of 127 hours let alone play one). I'm not saying it's probable. I'm simply saying that it's not impossible. People have survived the most extreme of conditions before.

My main point, though, is that this is pretty much par for the course with this story, books and show. Improbable shit happens all the time. Hell, impossible shit happens all the time. I'm not going to knock the game for doing something that the books and show do constantly. It's par for the course, imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...