• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Neptunium

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

718 profile views
  1. I wonder if one can read while skinchanging. Jon found Mormont's Raven perched on the chair over the desk with the agreement with the Iron Bank on it:
  2. I don't think the OP is talking about the Dragonball character. "孙悟空" is a character from Chinese mythology. In Mandarin, his name is "Sun Wukong". In Japanese, his name is "Son Goku" (the first dozen or so episodes of Dragonball started out as a parody of Journey to the West). It's possible the Woman with a Wonkey Tail is based on the same mythical character (Sun Wukong/Son Goku) that Goku in Dragonball was based on.
  3. It's interesting to me that you see the Clegane brothers, as well as Victarion, as introverted. They all strike me as huge extroverts (I guess Sandor is introverted in some ways and extroverted in others).
  4. Read the full sentence :-D "...or at least I'm not aware of any variation of the theory where R+J is true, but Ned genuinely believes that Jon's his own son" It was my bad attempt at a joke haha
  5. I don't think Edric Dayne's lying, but I see no reason why he would know. When the Tower of Joy was going down, Edric Dayne wasn't there, and he was an infant. I don't see any reason why he'd be a reliable source. Ned lying about Jon's parentage is the foundation behind R+L=J (or at least I'm not aware of any variation of the theory where R+J is true, but Ned genuinely believes that Jon's his own son).
  6. You're assuming that Ned was being truthful to Robert, and that Edric Dayne is a 100% reliable source on the subject.
  7. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that any descendants of a king directly through the male line could be called were princes. Is this not the case? (thinking out loud): The Aegon who was Rhaegar's son was a prince and grandson of the king, but he was in line for the throne, so that agrees with what you said. I could have sworn Egg was also a prince in the Hedge Knight (when he was grandson of the king and, at the time, only in line if many of his uncles and cousins died (which they did)). I think I'm due for a reread haha
  8. Would the Karstarks be considered a princely house prior to the Conquest? House Stark of Karl's Hold was founded by one of the son's of a King of Winter, so he must have been a prince, and logically his descendants must have been as well. I don't believe there are any references to it in the text, and it seems bizarre to me that a house so distantly related to the main branch would retain the title of "prince" (the ASOIAF wiki tells me says the house was founded "a thousand years ago"). At the same time, it seems odd to me that they'd officially change their name to "Karstark" if they derived their princely status from being related to the main branch of House Stark; and it's not like at one point they would have gone "I'm X+1 generations away from Karlon Stark, so I guess I can't inherit the title of 'prince' from my father". Were the Karstarks princes and princesses while the Starks were kings, right up until Aegon's conquest, or did they no longer hold those titles by then?
  9. Great post! I cringed a bit when you starting talking about volcanoes, but then I saw it's very well thought out! One idea I'd like to throw out there: the Children need not necessarily caused the volcano to erupt, but they could have forseen it and taken credit for it. Daenys the Dreamer saw the Doom of Valyria. If the Children had forseen the eruption, they might have claimed that they would raise the sea if the First Men didn't surrender (similar to Melisandre taking credit for the deaths of Renly, Geoffrey and Robb). Or they could have simply very suspisciously abandoned the coastline before the sea levels rose, and the First Men drew false conclusions.
  10. What was this based off, out of curiosity? Is there a thread I can read about it?
  11. It looks more like a horse to me. C is the head, E is the chest at the bottom of the neck, D is the front legs, B is the kneecaps of the back two legs, and A is the tail. Really though, if you look at an image like this long enough your brain will see something, whether it's there or not.
  12. Overall it wasn't a bad episode, but the only part that struck me as particularly bad was the Dornish part. It didn't make much sense, but unlike last season something might actually be happening in Dorne. Let's see if they actually make something from it. I wouldn't mind a lousy set-up a lot less if the plot that follows is good, which remains to be seen. Still, if they wanted Trystane and Doran dead, and the Sand Snakes in charge of Dorne they could have made it a lot better without adding much screentime. If Cersei killed Trystane in a rage and Doran did nothing, then Ellaria's actions would be more realistic. Better yet, if they had the support of the guards they could have confined Doran to a room and ruled in his name.
  13. This is just speculation, but bear with me for a minute. I like to think that Dany will issue an open challenge for Aegon to claim one of her dragons (i.e. "Sure, I'll marry Aegon and support Aegon's claim... if he can prove who he has by taming a dragon"), a challenge to which he won't respond. The people (high-born and low-born alike) might be excited by this at first, but when as time passes they might become increasingly suspicious and doubt Aegon's identity. I doubt it would be the end of it, but it will contribute to Dany's war effort all the same (just like rumour of Joffrey's parentage didn't make everyone run to Stannis, but it made people doubt Joffrey and benefited Stannis' campaign all the same) and make many lords just that little bit more likely to switch sides. In the end, if Dany wins, I imagine people would act like "Of course he wasn't a Targaryen, he couldn't ride a dragon!". Of course, we know that having Targaryen blood isn't a guarantee that you can tame a dragon (see Quentyn), and Aegon might not want to take the risk even if he might have the potential (I imagine he might be compelled to try it at first, but wise counselling (particularly from Doran, after hearing about Quentyn) might convince him otherwise. So it's possible Dany tears down the mummer's dragon not by proving Aegon's a fake, but by convincing Westeros that he is. I suspect he's a fake; but I also suspect that the reader might not learn more about the truth than now.
  14. Probably just others that we haven't seen. We know about Edric because he was acknowledged, and while Mya wasn't technically acknowledged she's in a similar boat (everyone knew she's Robert's bastard). We also hear about the twins in one of Cersei's flashbacks. The other bastards (Gendry, Bella and Barra) we only know about because they happened to cross path with POV characters in the books. It's not surprising that we haven't heard about any of his other lowborn bastards. Incidentally, I highly doubt that Jon's Robert's son. The timeline doesn't fit, he doesn't have the appearance (if it were anyone other than Robert this wouldn't be an issue, but a lot is made out of the "seed-is-strong" thing), and to my knowledge there's no foreshadowing towards it whatsoever.
  15. The biggest problem with rearming the faith was that they don't follow her. She just assumed the High Sparrow/High Septon would act as a puppet, until he didn't. If the High Septon had been someone loyal to the Lannisters (preferably a Lannister himself), it would have been much less of a problem. Making the army controlled by the faith itself was another problem. They could have used religion to raise an army similar to how the High Sparrow did it; having the High Septon giving the army his public support, but not actually having any control over it. The management should be in control of Westerlander knights (ideally with a Lannister at the head).