259 replies to this topic

[Captain Tripps]

Unnamed, on 23 June 2011 - 05:12 PM, said:

It just occurred to me...wouldn't that be a strange way for blood magic to work? I mean, who would ever even consider engaging in such magic?

TEACHER: Okay, here's the deal. You can do ONE blood magic spell in your life. Once you start the spell going, it is not complete until your death...

STUDENT: You know what, I don't think I really even need to learn this one. Can we just go back to the toe-jam magic stuff? I think I like it better.

-VM

Well it's black magic, those types of spells are almost ALWAYS double edged swords.   The spell requires life, how likely is it that the casters is excluded from the price? Practitioners usually find a way to offer up someone else in their place tho. and avoid paying it themselves.

Edited by Captain Tripps, 24 June 2011 - 06:43 PM.

[Captain Tripps]

Sega AM2, on 23 June 2011 - 07:05 PM, said:

It is implied that the Maesters of the Citadel were responsible for the extinction of Dragons from Westeros. Not the failure of the Targaryens to hatch or raise the young animals. Had the Citadel not interfered with the Dragons they likely would have lived on until the start of the series and beyond. Tyrion knew a lot about Dragons and even Viserys passed along lots of good knowledge about the beasts to his sister before he died.

We see that a blood sacrifice of some king, likely that of a King, is required to awaken Dragons. Fire and Dragon blood (Targaryen blood) is possibly also necessary. We also know that Melisandre strongly suspects that King's blood can "awaken stone dragons" and that Stannis has a small amount of Targaryen blood in him. We also know that Euron had hired a Warlock to hatch his egg, but when the Warlock failed Euron drowned him, and tossed his egg into the ocean.

Huh, where are you getting that from?  I'm interested, because it seemed to me that the Dragons were being bred the same way the Targ royal line was, and that inbreeding did the dragons in - that's why the skulls get progressively smaller and more misshapen (and why madness became a progressively more common trait among the kings).  No fresh genetic stock for the dragons once they were in Westeros, even the Targs occasionally married outside of their brothers/sisters.

These aren't the first dragon eggs a Targ has tried hatching, ever since the last one died they've been attempting to revive the line.  That's what I meant by Targ alone isn't enough.

[Timbits]

Gendry is pretty sexy.

[CryFenril]

Just a small side regarding dragons and magic - magic had not completely disappeared, but was much more powerful in the presence of dragons.

Wisdom Hallayne (the pyromancer from whom Tyrion and Cersei commission the wildfire) notes that their spells are working much more efficiently now, and asks Tyrion in joking fashion if he's seen any dragons about.

And in the marketplace, Quaithe tells Dany that the fire-dancer's ladder is only possible because of her dragons - before, the man was barely capable of controlling the flames he played with.

So apparently, dragons aren't necessary, but they sure are helpful.


*goes back to snickering about the boar and the large spoon*

[Lord O' Bones]

I'm going to commit the cardinal sin of not reading back to ask:

Did anyone else think it was hilarious that as Cat walked through her son's bannermen as they all bowed to her so did the horse?

[CryFenril]

I noticed that too, Bones, and wondered if it was deliberate, or if the horse just decided he was hungry right as she was walking by  

[Regina]

The best thing about this entire thread is the following:

Unnamed, on 21 June 2011 - 05:16 PM, said:

"It doesn't matter where he grips it. It's a simple question of weight ratios: A 5-ounce dragon could not carry a one-pound coconut. Look, a dragon has to flap its wings 43 times a second in order to maintain air-speed velocity--am I right?"

"If it was a 4-legged D&D dragon it could do it."

"Well, yes, but not a Valyrian dragon. That's my point."

"Of course, the D&D dragons are non-migratory..."

-VM

Bravo!

[Ashara]

Overoll, the TV series really warmed me to Dany's character -she is a bit more alive/real, easier to emphasise with and less pointless in the show- but I was still dissappointed she kept her locks in the fire. SIlly, I know, but I was imagining the actress bald for a few weeks it took me to watch the show.

[Fobulous]

I searched everywhere in the book of Game of the Thrones and for the life of my i just couldn't find the part where Jaime confessed to Catelyn. Not until i searched in "Clash of the Kings". I guess HBO just used the 2nd book to give viewers better understanding.

Excellent Season. I hope they will do Season 2 "Clash of the Kings"

[legba11]

Fobulous, on 27 June 2011 - 10:36 AM, said:

I searched everywhere in the book of Game of the Thrones and for the life of my i just couldn't find the part where Jaime confessed to Catelyn. Not until i searched in "Clash of the Kings". I guess HBO just used the 2nd book to give viewers better understanding.

Excellent Season. I hope they will do Season 2 "Clash of the Kings"

They are already in pre-production for season two, though it will be called Game of Thrones (they may add CoK tagline but I doubt it).

[Hyper]

beehives, on 22 June 2011 - 05:11 PM, said:

Really minor complaints here:

What did everyone think of the design of the dragons? (the nerdiest question I think I've ever asked) While unbelievably realistic looking, something just seemed "off" about their anatomy. Then I realized that they're missing tails! Long tails that could be wrapped around Dany's arm, like in the miniature. Maybe when they get bigger they'll grow one? Its hard for any flying object to get off the ground without a tail.

Pay closer attention. Others have already pointed it out, but this animated GIF makes the tail very clear:
( http://media.tumblr....Pqsb1qj13ax.gif )

In an interview D&D mentioned that bats and pterodactyls were large influences in the Dragon design. And I am *VERY HAPPY* that they went with four-limbed dragons. YAY. Every single large life form on earth above insects is a quadrapede (four-limbed). Hexapede (six-limbed) creatures make no sense IMO. Sure, there are plenty of bizarre mythical beasts that have six or more limbs (centaurs for example), but they are IMO always silly beyond words. GOT is trying to be realistic fantasy.

Edited by Hyper, 27 June 2011 - 02:49 PM.

[Sci-2]

I was surprised by the realism of the dragons - they weren't perfect, but I was dreaded their appearance given the budget that must, I believe, go into such things.

I also wish Dany's hair had burned off, but no biggie.

Quote

"I'm good at killing fat boys. I like killing fat boys."

Heh, I love Arya on this show more than I did in the books!

[Fobulous]

legba11, on 27 June 2011 - 12:59 PM, said:

They are already in pre-production for season two, though it will be called Game of Thrones (they may add CoK tagline but I doubt it).

Wow nice to hear the reception is that strong!

[Unnamed]

Captain Tripps, on 24 June 2011 - 06:32 PM, said:

Well it's black magic, those types of spells are almost ALWAYS double edged swords.   The spell requires life, how likely is it that the casters is excluded from the price? Practitioners usually find a way to offer up someone else in their place tho. and avoid paying it themselves.

Fair enough, but I was responding to your statement that (I thought) said that the blood magic spell continued to be active until MDD's death, and that BBQing her with Drogo "completed" the spell.

-VM

[Unnamed]

Captain Tripps, on 24 June 2011 - 06:41 PM, said:

Huh, where are you getting that from?  I'm interested, because it seemed to me that the Dragons were being bred the same way the Targ royal line was, and that inbreeding did the dragons in - that's why the skulls get progressively smaller and more misshapen (and why madness became a progressively more common trait among the kings).  No fresh genetic stock for the dragons once they were in Westeros, even the Targs occasionally married outside of their brothers/sisters.

These aren't the first dragon eggs a Targ has tried hatching, ever since the last one died they've been attempting to revive the line.  That's what I meant by Targ alone isn't enough.

As I recall, this is from a scene near AFFC,

Spoiler

involving Sam and one of the teachers at the citadel. He was claiming that the Maesters set out to destroy the dragons and poisoned them slowly over time. It was not clear to me, though, whether this was true or if the guy was a paranoid nut job.

-VM

[Unnamed]

CryFenril, on 24 June 2011 - 10:54 PM, said:

Just a small side regarding dragons and magic - magic had not completely disappeared, but was much more powerful in the presence of dragons.

Wisdom Hallayne (the pyromancer from whom Tyrion and Cersei commission the wildfire) notes that their spells are working much more efficiently now, and asks Tyrion in joking fashion if he's seen any dragons about.

And in the marketplace, Quaithe tells Dany that the fire-dancer's ladder is only possible because of her dragons - before, the man was barely capable of controlling the flames he played with.

So apparently, dragons aren't necessary, but they sure are helpful.


*goes back to snickering about the boar and the large spoon*

Point taken, that magic wasn't completely gone, but it sure seemed that it was weakened to the point of being useless. As I recall, creating Wildfire (or Greek Fire, or whatever they were calling it) didn't require magic, but magic sure made them able to make a lot of it faster.

Of course, I'm still not really clear if the dragons have some impact on ALL kinds of magic, or just certain kinds. For instance, could Melissandre make her shadow babies w/out dragons? And how can the Others go around doing their reanimator routine in GOT before the dragons hatched? I'm not demanding that you answer, just throwing these out sorta rhetorically. But if you happen to know the answers...

-VM

[Shepherd6]

Unnamed, on 24 June 2011 - 05:58 PM, said:

[list]

[*]MDD says that "only death pays for life" as if it were a general principle. Seems an odd inversion--I would understand it better if she said "life pays for life", but even so...it seems that people in this world conceive children in the normal way. Whose deaths are paying for regular conceptions, all the spermy men with the pumped up kicks? Does this mean that there is always the same number of total living creatures in the world? When a woman gets pregnant, does a lizard drop dead somewhere?

-VM

Lmfao. Totally made my day.

[Asha—Not Yara!]

Heh, on a more serious note, I took MDD's "Only death pays for life" to mean if you want to save a particular life from dying, then something else has to die in its place.

Edit: Had to correct a typo even if it is immortalized in a quote.  

Edited by Mellisandra, 05 July 2011 - 10:38 AM.

[Unnamed]

Mellisandra, on 30 June 2011 - 09:16 AM, said:

Heh, on a more serious note, I took MDD's "Only death pays for life" to mean if you want to save a particularly life from dying, then something else has to die in its place.

I basically took it that way, too. However, it seemed an inversion to me because I would think that it is, in reality, life that is paying for life (with death being the way payment is made). Having it phrased that way causes me to wonder if there is a subtle distinction being made...

Regardless of the subtleties of phrasing, the notion is presented as some sort of general principle (as opposed to a a rule specific to the workings of blood magic). And it's when I try to imagine the concept as a general principle that I start having strange ideas.

And, of course, there is the fact that Drogo was not actually dead yet. Theoretically, he still had his own life to make use of (if not his health). If he had died, and they were about to reanimate him, I would have understood the transaction better.

Of course, all this is trying to read far more into the scene than the info really justifies. But it's hard to resist the temptation, since GRRM didn't really offer much explanation as to why these singular events played out the way they did. In fairness, there's little reason to expect that the characters really understood, either, and this is a 3rd Person Limited structure...

-VM

[RSasoiaf]

Hmmmm

just on a funny note, if you really want to nitpick, there is something on the ending scene which really doesn work if you look at it.

When they made the full stop and then its early morning, we are suposed to believe that no one managed to notice both Danny or her dragons during at least a couple hours from night to early morning. I wonder....what were they all doing??? Did they all went to sleep and just left the thing burning? What if it would catch fire to some tents or something nearby? you know....having a big fire burning while everyone goes to sleep may be dangerous.

And what was Danny and specially her dragons doing during the night? was there no suspicious sounds? I bet everyone thought "naaaa....just our minds playing tricks on us" or Danny was telling her dragons to keep quite. Or maybe dragons only scream when in daylight....maybe....but it still is a bit strange.

Also, it was some stretch having Danny clearly imply to Jorah that she was going to enter the fire. Not sure he had that kind of faith and belief on her powers. And i´m quite he would have remembered other Targs who have killed themselves the same way on a not so distant past. If Jorah would have realized she was going in, he would have stopped her by all means possible.