divica

Members
  • Content count

    330
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by divica

  1. Maybe rhaegar wanted tptwp to be named Aegon and at that point he thought it was jon? Depending on the legal side of things maybe rhaegar wanted to make his sons with lyanna his heirs so he decided to name him Aegon?
  2. the jon name was certainly by ned, but while lyanna was pregnant she and rhaegar certainly discussed names and decided in a name for a boy and another for a girl...
  3. And what if jon's true name is also Aegon? Do you have the exact quote from grrm?
  4. Just to add that we actually have a close reference to "a song of ice and fire" in the "pact of ice and fire". So, if the "song of ice and fire" is an actual story within the planetos universe it makes sense that for the characters it is related to house stark and targaryen. Therefore it makes sense for rhaegar to link it to jon because he is the union of those 2 houses. On the other hand how can rhaegar link it to his first Aegon? We haven t seen any connection between Aegon and ice elements... In addition, if we consider that D&D aren t complete idiots and decided to then there is more evidence that jon might actually be the baby described in the pictury. Besides, if I am not mistaken elia was bedridden for several months after Aegon was borne and rhaegar was galivating shortly after Aegon was borne (in order to conceive jon) so is it even possible to be elia in the scene? I am pretty sure this must have been discussed a thousand times so is there a concensus? The biggest problem in the Aegon in the vision being jon ends up being that rhaegar's speech about needing another head doesn t make much sense (he would have his 2 previous kids+jon)... The most I can think is that the vision isn t a real scene and is used to show danny that jon is Aegon and is the second head and that she must find the third head.
  5. I hope you are very wrong about nearly all your predictions. I think grrm said danny and tyrion will meet in the book (towards the middle or end?) however I think if you read the realeased chaps you will find out about what happens with the siege of meereen I change my opinion about what happens to stannis every year. I mean, his northern army can t be defeated because there aren t any more northern soldiers and at the same time I don t think he will win winterfell. So I think he somehow has to return to the Wall where something will happen to him and jon will end up in charge of the army and eventually somehow king in the north? Oh, and I kind of hope that in the first jon chapters bran sends him dreams/visions about important stuff related to the ww and kind of trains his warging abilities (like arya was starting to do if I am not mistaken). In regards to KL, I agree that it will be very similar with the people revolting against cersei and declaring Aegon as the true king. And a greyscale plague would be something grrm might do (completly unexpected) but I fail to see what it could do for the story besides weakning westeros even further... And there are a lot of interesting things that might have happened to Benjen. however by now he must have been a captive from the wildlings, cotf or others (for misterious reasons) and maybe alister will end up saving him?
  6. I think it could have worked if they introduced him in the primiere of season five (like oberyn was in season 3) and make him give a ride to tyrion like in the books. After that they could make him go hire the golden company with the endrosement of varys or one of his friends and end season five with them sailing to westeros/ starting to conquer the stormlands/ somthing like that. This would also be good for the story of jon's parentage because we would have more characters that could talk about what happened in the time of robert's rebellion. I think the only possible motives to not use Aegon are that he ends up as being non important in the books, D&D thought he would make danny look lame and stupid because a character in similar conditions as her would be much more efective in conquering westeros or they simply like their feminine empowerment too much.
  7. I think that seeing what in the show this season Aegon should have been included. The thruth is everybody has had enough of cersei, we wouldn t need the ridiculous disaperance of the dornish and reach armies for reasons no one understands, we wouldn t have people misteriously accepting cersei as their queen, we wouldn t have the infinite lannister army and other idiotic plots! To me after cersei burned the septon the smallfolk of KL shoud have rebelled and killed her and her soldiers in the city. Then Aegon arrives as the hero of the people, the heir to the throne, etc... with a dornish wife and making some highgarden hand and with the golden company. This combination would be a much more believable chalenge for danny than cersei is. In adition, instead of ignoring the riverlands and the vale they should have them unite with the north so that we would have 3 clear factions (Aegon conquered the stormlands before KL)...
  8. I don t understand you. You are saying that you agree that if somebody is alive he wouldn t be a wight. In the show beric's body is alive so you agree he isn t a wight? Honestly I didn t understand your post. The discussion was if in the show beric and jon are fire wights or not because their bodies are alive. And you agree with me and then talk about the books where beric is obviously a fire wight because grrm said so.
  9. To me in the bolded part where he says "his heart isn t beating, his blood isn t flowing in his veins, he's a wight". Him being a wight is a conclusion from what he said earlier. If his body was alive he wouldn t be a wight.
  10. Again. In the show there aren t fire wights because both jon and beric have beating hearts and breath. So beric doesn t foreshadow a lot besides plot holes. Besides grrm says beric.is a wight because his body is dead even though he is alive (read your quote). So if in the books there are consequences for ressurectiom amd diferent ways to use magic that don t exist in the show what do you want to conclude? Logic show is diferent from book logic...
  11. Have you read what grrn says? He calls him a wight because even though he is ressurected his body is dead, his heart isn t beating. What I am saying is that a fire wight is a person ressurected by fire magic into a dead body that stays dead (so the body is animated by fire magic because it is biologically impossible for a dead body to.move). In the show jon and beric bodies have beating hearts and breath... therefore they aren t fire wights. They are people ressurected with fire magic into living bodies. Did you understand?
  12. To me it is a person ressurected by fire magic into a body animated by fire magic. The body isn t alive. To me that is the complete information given by grrm.
  13. To me a fire wight is a person ressurected by fire into a body animated by fire magic. It isn t a true ressurection. That is what grrm said. And jon warging into gohst is 99% true because of the prologue and mel vision where jon is constantly changing between gohst and man. Adding that jon thinks of gohst in the last moment there is a lot of book canon that supports this theory. On the other hand there is zero book canon suporting mel ressurecting jon in the book. She shouldn t even have the motivation to do so. You are using show canon and using an interview about another character to predict future book events. However, in matters related to magic the show isn t a good source. For example, what would be the point for the show to have jon warging into gohst? 1) there would tons of people saying it was deux ex machina 2) they don t want the starks warging into the wolves 3) jon ressurection had zero consequences, so why add the warging? Warging into gosht would only be useful for book readers...
  14. Again, we aren t really sure about if and how jon ressurects because his ressurection had no consequences in the show besides leaving the NW which can happen diferently... And don t forget that the show cut a lot of magic that exists in the books, so them using mel doesn t mean she must do it in the books. Again, grrm doesn t say that beric was foreshadowing for jon specifcally. You are the one assuming it as fact. Besides what we actually know as 99% fact is that if jon dies his conscience will go into gohst! It won t go into whatever comes after life and it is a great difference compared to beric. Just this fact makes me doubt that mel could ressurect jon with a dead body because we hanven t seen noone warging into a dead body yet and somehow move the body. So could you discribe preciselly what is a fire wight for you?
  15. The problem is that in the show beric isn t a wight. He is a ressurected person with normal body functions. And in the books jon isn t confirmed to be dead. Grrm said that in his books beric is a fire wight. That doesn t apply yet to jon because in the show there aren t fire wights and jon isn t yet dead in the books... And I think you are applying the word wight wrongly. To be a wight I think you must be using a dead body (as in your heart doesn t beat while you are walking around). Besides, even by you definition if after his body dies jon wargs into gohst, then someone heals his body and then he wargs back into his body he was never dead nor.ressurected. the wight thing is a phisical matter!
  16. I didn t remember that tyrion thought about dragons that much. That is a valid argument. His atitude towards Jaime and cersei can also be because he never thought they could be anybody else's children but his. Why would he go investigating about their parentage? In regards to tyrion is completly diferent. Tywin wouldn t father a dwarf if he wasn t sure he was the father. And saying he would raise a baby his wife had with another man... The only possible way he could contemplate it is if she was raped, however if it happened tywin would have let up something... GRRM always lets on something about his plot twists. And saying "you are no son of mine" while dying isn t what I think a man like tywin would say to tyrion if he thought he wasn t his son in that situation. In adition, even if tyrion was the product of rape I think tywin would make one of his bannermen raise tywin instead of fathering him... Even that conversation with Moqorro is literary better if tyrion is a man that ends up meeting every dragon and influencing them in some way (jon, danny, Aegon are certain and if varys is a blackfyre as so many people think tyrion also influences him) than a dragon meeting all the other dragons and givng them advices... Tyrion isn t a dragon sage... After all this, obviously it is possible that tyrion could be a targ. However I think it is much better if he was the only true son of tywin.
  17. Isn t tyrion obecessed (meaning interested) in dragons only after knowing they exist? and because he wants to see them? That is completly diferent from how the other targs feel about dragons... (even if the other targs are kind of taught to be obecessed about dragons so I don t think this is very important. Doesn t tywin atitude of not killing tyrion not killing tyrion actually suport that after all his investigations he thinks tyrion is his son? otherwise he would have killed him! And what about tyrion's appearence is related to targs? If there were purple eyes and silver or platinium hair... Most of what you said to me supports tyrion not being a targ...
  18. I really don t think tyrion is a targ. If there are lannysters that are actually targs they must be cersei/Jaime. They fit the targ criteria perfectly. Jaime is great, cersei and jofrey are mad. They are both beautifull and they are tiwin's pride. How poetic and perfect would it be that the son he always hated would be his only son? that he would end up inheriting casterly rock? The only reason I think people think tyrion is a targ is because they like him. There is very little or no evidence at all that he could be a targ...
  19. If jorah doesn t accept his familly ancestral sword why would he accept the ancestral sword from other familly he has no connection to? Besides curing him of gryscale you guys also want sam to give him his familly's sword? THAT makes no sense... Besides sam will use it to protect his familly (gilly and the baby)... He doesn t need to be a great swordsman to deserve the sword, just be willing to fight the ww. And sam is!
  20. Any valyrian sword would have meaning for a show watcher. Then if any character says it was the sword the first Aegon used the sword becomes instantly epic. The same would happen for a sword used by an historic character. That is a no argument. And jon is 95% stark because he was robbed by ned of knowing about the other side of his familly. It makes sense that he will want to know more about targs and his father... Besides taking a sword from his father's side of the familly isn t going all targ... The show doesn t care about the Blackfyre rebellion and in the books it could mean the targs and blackfyre's will be one familly again (there are so few of them left anyway). I don t think it matters all that much that dark sister was done for a woman as bloodraven was in possesion of it in the past... Besides, in the books bloodraven or bran migh be able to give the sword to jon somehow and the show doesn t care about those details. It makes sense. Rhaegar thought he was tptwp so he would need a worthy sword. Rhaegar thinks his son would be tptwp so he left him the sword. And it makes sense for jon to acept his targ side in some ways...
  21. IF he is the rightfull heir blackfyre is probably the best sword for him, if not we also have darksister. Both targ swords that make much sense than using a bastard sword from a northern lord... Longcaw makes more sense for jorah's arc when he rights his wrongs and gains enough honnor to wield his father sword. Besides, as I said above Rhaegar had time, Money and means to get a sword (old or maybe even new) worthy of th ptwp (which he tought was him and later his son). I mean you don t think Rhaegar would be tptwp with a common sword... When he thought his son was the ptwp he could have left the sword in th ToJ and Ned hid it somewhere...
  22. Up to now it isn t to late to make danny some sort of villain. I dont think she will go mad but will become cold and cruel. To me it is the route her character is taking... And everybody has to calm her down everytime so that she doesn t go in a rage murdering spree. So danny could say fuck the others, fuck the smallfolk and everybody else and use her dragons and armies to kill everything between her and the iron throne in what she would consider justice...
  23. I think Longclaw is jon snow's sword. When he finds who his parents are he will get a new sword because he is jon snow no longer.
  24. Or more likely jon will wield a sword rhaegar left for him. I mean, you can t think you or your son are the ptwp and don t look for the best weapon in the world... And don t forget that Rhaegar had the money, means and time before Robert's rebellion to get it. Then, if he is convinced jon is th ptwp he could have left the sword in the ToJ with lyanna who ends up telling Ned about it or Ned sees the sword and thinks it was meant for jon... This could fit both books and show!
  25. People that criticize their plan tend to Forget a lot of things. 1) why would anyone believe that the tyrells bannermen would answer cersei's call after what she did to the tyrells? It would be the same as having the dornish betray the sandsnakes... Besides it isn t common to have so many bannermen revolt against their lord. 2) The reach and dornish armies are civilised, westerosi and between 100 to 150K soldiers. why should it be hard for this many soldiers to siege KL and keep the lannisters soldiers inside? (at most 40 to 50K and I am being generous) 3) Danny and the show writters don t want to make her a villain. It is pretty hard to film a person burning thousands of people in a city and don t make her appear as a villain. Besides, all the people in westeros would hate danny. She would never have peace. In order to rule by fear you have to be a monster and it has its drawbacks and advantages...