• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Orphalesion

  • Rank
    The Younger and More Beautiful "Queen"

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

3,045 profile views
  1. If you think about it, Craster rules his own lands, with nobody, not even Mance above him, maybe that's enough to make his sons of "royal blood"? What is a king, but a ruler of a large piece of land with nobody else above him?
  2. They have a wind and sea god, like the Sistermen and the ones featured in the founding legend of Storm's End. And if "Theon Stark" is anything to go by, they might have First Men names as well. Also not seeing what's so drastically different between "Asha" and "Sansa" or "Arya". If you read the rest of the post, you would have seen that I pointed out the religion aspect and compared them to the Sistermen in that regard. The First Men likely had a religion before they adopted the Old Gods.
  3. They are dead anyway with her in charge.
  4. People that start a uprising because that woman has no business sitting on a Throne when she's nowhere close to the line of succession. There just shouldn't be hordes of nobles standing by like that. I think if Cecily Neville would have just planted her ass on the Throne after Richard III croaked, somebody would have had some strong words for her. Words which would have included "guards" and "dungeon".
  5. If he is a Targaryen bastard, The situation with Aegon, Jon and Daenerys is very ambiguous, since we do not know all of the details (whether Aeris was purposefully passing over Rhaegar's line in favour of his second son, whether that would still be relevant, what Jon's status is, whether the fact that Daenerys has bonded Dragons will have any influence on the decision, what influence Daenery's status as a woman has etc.) In any case, however, the Targaryen line of succession doesn't really matter anymore. Their title was stripped off of them and now it's a free for all for the three surviving ones to see how manages to grab hold of it. The Throne will be taken by Right of Conquest and the de jure justifications will be decided on/made up/worded nicely by advisors and ministers. All three gonna have a claim and it depends on who gets to push theirs successfully.
  6. From the same starting position as the TV show was at the end of season 6? That's difficult because, as everybody knows the really bad problems started in Season 5. If we only consider Season 7 then all anybody can do is "damage control" 1. Show Cersei struggling to desperately keep the realm under her control, nobody should trust her or cheer for her after what she did. There should be a civil war. A gigantic one with more factions and fronts than the TV show can feasibly depict in one short season. I still think however that some tension could have been kept by simply stating that most of Westeros has collapsed into anarchy with Cesei and Dany each holding some scattered pockets. We should see things like nobles shouting at Cersei in the Throne Room, dissent, riots in King's Landing. Joffrey and Tommen had to deal with dissent, why doesn't Mad Queen Romulan, the Ugliest of Dress? 2. Jaime needs to be against Cersei from the moment he learns of the Sept and Tommen. No surprise pregnancy to manipulate him. Or otherwise have the pregnancy be fake an a failed attempt of Cersei's to manipulate him. In any case the final break between them should happen way sooner. 3.Dany loses Dorne to factions of Dornish nobles who depose of Elaria and the Sand Snakes. Dorne is useless for the remainder of the War because the different factions can't decide whom to put on their throne. Maybe in Season 8 Dany can visit and unite the warring factions under her. 4.My inner Tyrell fanboy will say introduce Willas and/or Garlan as the new heir to Highgarden (and Margery's cousin) and possible rival for Jon in the Dany/Jon romance. 5. Speaking of said romance: it needs to be introduced earlier and developed more. 6.If any Wight Hunt has to happen, it happens in order to convince Daenerys to help stop the Others, not Queen Romulan. This happens earlier as to bring a justification why Daenerys just doesn't attack KL. 7.Even so I can see no justification for Cersei to survive longer than the middle of the season. So either a battle for King's Landing has to happen or Cersei has to blow up the city (with Jaime strangling her) as Dany stands at the gates. 8.Instead Euron gets promoted to main human bad guy, Amp up his powers and it works. 9.Witnerfell needs to be completely re-written all of it was BS. I have no either what should happen there, but it needs to be something entirely different, also everybody there needs the 90 IQ points back the writers have stolen from them two season ago. And yeah Arya needs to be waaaay less schizophrenic. Sansa is pretty much a lost cause since they have taken her proper storyline away from her, can only do some damage control here by playing up the "Lady of Witnerfell" aspect. Playing the two of them as a close-knit and powerful sister duo from the very start would both make sense and please the viewers. To get rid of Littlefinger (a mercy kill by now) have Sansa get an idea of Arya's capabilities and then ask her sister for help in dealing with their unwanted guest. 10. If Dany has to lose the Reach, then, like Dorne have it be lost to local infighting. Have Randyll Tarly make an attempt to crown himself King of the Reach and have him rally any houses that might be disgruntled with the way the Tyrells have distrubed the region's peace by meddling with Renly and the Lannisters and march on Highgarden. 11. Have the season end with Daenerys sitting on a snow covered throne in the destroyed Red Keep and word arriving (possibly from Jon) that the Wall has fallen and that the Wights are marching South.
  7. No, not really odd at all. Speeches, personal charisma and gifts are pretty much how the leaders of some primitive, pre-feudal societies ensured the loyalty of their subjects. The King's Moot is fairly similar to Viking societies. Particularly the bribes/gifts. If you look at surviving tales form the Viking Age and before (like the Edda) you will notice the nobles and gods constantly hand each other gifts and presents and the distribution of loot and wealth was an important ceremony in those cultures. This is even still present in feudalism and you can see that it is expected of the Iron Throne to hand out lands and titles to those that serve it. It's often forgotten but feudalism, in its original form was pretty much a mutual agreement between a lord and their subjects; service and goods in exchange for service and goods and that agreement was fairly fragile and could and was frequently broken on both sides. A feudal king had to waste a lot of time, energy and resources in keeping his lords happy. And originally, in the Dark Ages, elective monarchies were fairly common, particularly in societies like the Iron Born. Even in-universe you can see parallels to the elective office of the Wildling King. Since both the Wildlings and the Iron Born are basically First Men it stands to reason that King's Moots and elective leadership might have been fairly common among them as well in the distant past (hence it being an old custom). Old customs sometimes survive among isolated populations (such as the Iron Born, who, like the Sistermen, also seem to have kept a variation of Pagan First Men believes rather than adopting the Old Gods from the Children) And just like in real life, there are even vestiges of it in Westerosi Feudalism, ritualized as it may be, the nobles of Westeros still have to declare for a new king whenever there's a succession and do so in exchange for being gifted titles and lands. The difference is really that the various Greenlander Kings/Lords managed to convince each other that they don't need to hassle with moots and elections and that the whole succession business can basically run on autopilot.
  8. Me kinda as well, but that's not because he kills some characters, but because basically nothing at all happens in FFC/DWD/the sample chapters of WoW. [sarcasm] Yes, Martin is actually not interested in telling an interesting or coherent story, these books are really just vehicles to indulge his fetish in writing death scenes. And yes, this is a very "shocking" "revelation" and you are positively the first person in the history of this fandom to suggest this. [/sarcasm] Oh yay, one of those theories that tries to glean info on the ending of SOIAF by comparing it to the short stories. You mean like in most of the better written portions of 20th/21st century literature? This doesn't even begin to make sense and you are playing armchair psychologist. Now I wouldn't especially care if all the main players are dead by the last page, but I see no indication of this motivation. Unless a sequel is published characters in a novel don't have a "life" beyond the last page of their story anyway. And even if a character dies on page they "live on" as their story remains in the public mindset no matte how alive their author is at the moment. So this is senseless and futile at the same time. What does that have to do with anything? Why is it "everybody finds their one true love and has seventeen babies and five puppies/kittens" or "rocks fall, everybody dies"? There's a lot of ground between those two extremes. And are you really invested in whether the sorry loser who lusts after the white 13-year-old gets his chance to be with her? How many well written fantasy stories end with "Love Ever After Without Problems Ever" anyway? Because the only example I can think of is Sam and Rosie in the LoTR and Rosie is also dead by the end of the epilogues (spoilerz!!!!) How exactly would that be a "bad" ending or turn of events? It would be freaking epic to have an endgame where that much actual change and tearing down of the old happens. My worries are the opposites. I'm afraid that the story will end with basically nothing changed except for the animal symbol of the house that sits the throne. Nah, the ending will be "bittersweet" Again I don't understand why people interpret "bittersweet" as an absolutely terrible turn of events. The LoTR is bittersweet, the Last Unicorn is bittersweet (on the bitter side of bittersweet really) "Bittersweet" does not mean hopelessness and death all around. This is rather pointless. You just make wild guesses at the fates of some second, third and fourth tier characters. And again, I'm not writing this because I desperately want any of the characters to survive, at this point I'm only rooting for the story to end, at all and in a hopefully fairly epic way. And an apocalyptic war that tears down the wall, castles that have been established for millennia and society as a while alongside extinguishing family lines left and right and killing main characters like flies would be a pretty epic way to end it. Though if we are unlucky the story will end with the council of the Others (introduced in 2023 in a sample chapter for WoW) still five years from voting on whether they should take steps to plan to consider to move towards actions that might result in them breaching the walls some when during the next three decades.
  9. Comic relief is supposed to be entertaining, not boring and a waste of space. So; nope.
  10. It's a reference to the rainbow being a sacred symbol in the Faith of the Seven... I also don't see the correlation between the title of the thread and the OP...
  11. ....whut? Why are these very specific and rare/specialty events/things "notable" by their absence? We don't see every aspect or event that has happened in the world since it's creation so...I dunno why things like eclipses or earthquakes/eruptions simply not happening during ASOIAF and not being specifically pointed out in the backstory is "weird"? Only because you have constructed a hidden meaning to those things which requires them to be important doesn't mean it actually exists in the tex or that they have to be important. Why should there be Virgin Birth or Menstrual Magic? GRRM isn't required to put every single type of magic into the books. Same with every type of food, plant of animal. And for all we know the winters are regular, little ice ages. I mean it's like saying "There's no Gorgons in ASOIAF, whatever is up with that?"
  12. Nobody, the point of the story is that Monarchy is an incredibly flawed and that none of the so called "Kings" or the "Queen" really has the right to bring pain and destruction over the smallfolk only because they want an uncomfortable chair. NO!
  13. First of all Stannis is not gonna be king of anything. Ever. Get over it. All he's ever gonna be is a pretender/rebel, dead and possibly some sort of Other/Wight. Second I still don't get the fascination people have with splitting up Westeros. I have explained many, many times why this would be unecessary and undesirable, so I'll just list some key points. No language barrier (no reason to split because of that) Almost no cultural barriers (everything from the Neck to the Passes of Dorne is one culture, so no reason to split because of that) Almost no religious barriers (everything from the Neck to the Passes of Dorne worships the Seven, no reason to split along those lines) No/Almost no ethnical barriers, most of Westeros is a happy mish-mash of Andals and First Men (as confirmed by the author) So no reason to split along those lines. The Ironborn need to be kept under the heel. The Riverlands will be everyone's bitch again, even more so than they are now. The Crownlands will be everyone's bitch again. There will be constant warfare along the Dornish borders again. If the Ironborn are not kept under the Heel they';; rape everyone along the Western Coast again. It's just a bad idea and I honestly don't get why people are so obsessed with it.
  14. THANK YOU! I positively hate it when people on these forums start their Glorious Northern Master Race (TM) or Glorious Pure Stark Bloodline that keeps the Others at bay (TM) bullshit. It's not only fucking creepy and wrong from a modern perspective, it also undercuts a lot of the themes of the story itself. It's why "There must always be a Stark at Winterfell" is bullshit as well. In one of the books she did something at the Hour of the Bat, and because some people think that every word in this story is foreshadowing for something, they think she has a connection to bats.
  15. Well first I will say that personally I could never admire or respect someone only because they are strong or intelligent, but only for the ways they use those advantages. So respecting Littlefinger just because he is good at manipulating people is a very alien mindset to me. That being said I like (not respect, not admire, not condone) Ramsay just because of how over the top and hilarious his blatant villainy is and how happy he is doing what he does and at the same time how clearly messed up he is. I found myself laughing at several of his chapters.