• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Kyll.Ing.

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1,188 profile views
  1. Well, the thread title seems a little more... unfortunate in light of these news. Onto something completely different. I mused a little in the previous thread if the trilogy was meant to be unfinished, and this "Tricked you into reading" part didn't really soothe me. I think a great portion of the appeal of this series lies in the contrasts between the past and the present. We're shown a present time where Kvothe has built himself the reputation of a living legend, but lives as a washed-out barkeep in the middle of nowhere. A war is going on, a king has been killed, and the once-legendary Chandrian have apparently gone on a bit of a spree. Monsters roam the land, and things look pretty dire overall. Then we see the past. A young and talented Kvothe loses his parents after they begin unraveling some old legends. He lives a troubled life as a street kid, but is able to wit himself into university. Over the next few years, we see him go from learning the basics of magic to actively practising it. He gets friends, he gets an education, the realm is at peace, and the Chandrian remain the stuff of legends. Book two even ends on a very happy note. The question that intrigues the reader is: "What the heck happened in between?" Who was the king that was killed, and how/why did Kvothe kill him? Why did the war start? What caused the Chandrian to emerge, and why did they kill Kvothe's parents all those years ago? What broke Kvothe's spirit so badly? What happened to Denna, and what's the deal with her at all? Where did Bast come from? So many plot threads we see the beginning and end of, but the middles remain mysterious. There are times I wonder if it is all an elaborate prank. If Rothfuss wrote a great set-up, a massive tangle of mysteries, with no intention of ever untangling it. After all, tying together the beginning and the end is hard work, even if you know the ending (ref.: the series behind this forum) The mysteries may even be more intriguing than the solution, and sometimes not knowing can be even more interesting than knowing for certain (ref.: the General (ASOIAF) subforum). Sure, it would make the publisher angry. But the payoff from the first two books is great enough to make a comfortable living anyway, and the publisher has also made their investment back and then some. I don't find it entirely unconceivable that the series was written with the intention to deliver questions without answers, anticipation without delivery. However, I think it would fall apart (or at least, stop making money) if the author was ever to spill the beans on the plan, so it's not like he could ever admit it.
  2. To be quite honest, this looks a lot like one of those "My uncle works for Nintendo" type of posts that pop up on the Internet every so often. The only thing that keeps me from being convinced that he made it all up, is that he didn't make any outrageous claims or predictions. Usually, those kinds of posts have an element of sensation to them ("There will be an alternate evolution of Pikachu!" or the like), intended to make them spread as far and fast as possible. But this guy could basically have been making a summary of the things that have been said over the last fifteen pages in this thread, there's nothing in it that hasn't been alleged by others before.
  3. I'm afraid I find myself agreeing with @SuperMario here. The theory-building in the classic sense of the term, "what does this piece of text imply for the direction the series is heading?" has been exhausted years ago. An author can be brilliant and write clever twists, but if clues to the further development of the story is hidden in already-published text, it can't be practically hidden from thousands of obsessed fans reading every book several times, then devoting weeks of their spare time to discuss the meaning of every paragraph in them. The forum has been circling around the same discussions for years now (there have been 165 twenty-page threads on R+L = J already), and it's mostly old people saying the same stuff over again, or new people stumbling across the same old clues. What is left now is the stuff you have in your signature. Wild guesses as to the end-game of the saga, based more on flights of fancy than clues and foreshadowing. It might be a decent guess, but it's a total shot in the dark. The solid foundations to base theories upon have long since been exhausted. I think the series is big, popular, and well-written enough that these forums can be sustained indefinitely by new people coming in to discuss the clues they've found for their first time. But after a few years of discussions, there isn't that much more to talk about. It's a series of finite size, after all. ASOIAF won't go away any time soon, but longtime fans might. I find myself checking these forums less and less often, and it's kind of disheartening to see that the threads on TWoW information sit dormant for years without anything happening. It's nice to see that the General subforum still has so much activity in it, but it's nothing I haven't seen variations of before. It's not really a place for me to enjoy any more.
  4. To steer the thread slightly back towards its tracks, let me weigh in with my opinion. I think the author is morally, but not legally of course, obligated to provide closure to their fans. There is an implied agreement that, whatever happens, the followers should get to know how the story goes in the end. That being said, closure can mean a lot of things (maybe more/fewer/other things than I think, English is not my first language). It doesn't necessarily mean the author should crap out a sequel just for the sake of finishing a story, actually that should probably be avoided at all costs. It can mean the story gets its ending and the series is wrapped up nicely. It can mean the author makes it clear they are unable to finish it. It can mean a brusque and depressive "don't expect anything more from this series, I'm not", or "the trilogy is open-ended and book two provided that open ending". It can mean a news bulletin announcing the author's passing. Any of those would serve as closure, although some way less satisfying than others. But at least they all state, more or less clearly, which page of the story is officially the last one. What should not happen, at any rate, is prolonged uncertainty. The series can be open-ended, but the state of the series should not be left hanging. If the author is unable to finish the work, and self-aware enough to realize it will not be done in the foreseeable future bar a drastic change of circumstances/motivation, that message should reach those eagerly waiting for more news. An unfinish work can still inspire feelings in its readers. After turning the last page with words on it, it's up to the reader to imagine what happens next. That imagination can sometimes provide a better story than an uninspired author could. But the words "to be continued" imply that the story is intended to continue from the pen of the author, making the reader's imagination a less "authentic" provider of continuation. As long as a sequel remains a possibility, it will always mean the "official" story is still going on, unfinished. TL;DR: There is no legal obligation to finish the story, or even a moral one. But if the author gives up on their work, they should be expected to let their fans know.
  5. Indeed. That twist was something I hadn't anticipated in the slightest. Wonder how (not if!) it will affect the rest of the series. Looking forward to read it when it comes out, at any rate!
  6. Spoilers for Episode 6:
  7. I'm usually of the opinion that 90 % of the posts in the rant threads are just made for the sake of picking the episode apart. Therefore, I tend to avoid the threads. However, the plot line beyond the wall was such an incoherent clusterfudge from its conception to its aftermath that an "oh, it was all a dream and I'm still on Dragonstone and we're mining dragonglass" ending would actually have improved it at this point. The... incident... has been covered so extensively by now that I guess that the original contribution I could make would be to point out that the chains would be more likely to tear the head off the dragon than pulling it out of the water. It's stuck under the ice, and a lot of force is applied. At the very least, its neck would be soundly broken in a dozen places.
  8. Worse still... they had a long, nice lake to drag those chains across. Hundreds of wights per length of chain. Sounds like sufficient force to tear the dragon's head off pull the dragon out of the lake. I guess its neck would be pretty broken now, though. Effectively, they've hanged the dragon with iron collars, via the pull of chains and friction rather than the pull of gravity, but the same principle is at work. There would be a lot of dislocated disks in that dragon neck at the very least. And for some reason, the work leader decided to let the front of the columns walk up a hill while pulling. Congratulations, all those men at the front are now worse than useless. The force they pull with would pull the chains taut - that is, a straight line from the top of the hillside to the dragon - thereby lifting the middle and end of the columns (who are still marching on flat ice) up in the air, instead of helping them put horizontal force on the dragon. Okay, arguably this is the direction they want to pull the dragon in in the first place (out of the ice instead of along the lakebed), but then the rear of the columns just weigh the chains down and pull in the wrong direction anyway. In either case, only half the men are actually doing something to get the dragon out of the lake, the other half are making it harder. Rope pulling only helps when everybody is pulling in the same direction. These guys had a bend in the chains - against the direction of gravity, no less - which would make the contribution of roughly half the members completely useless. No wonder why we see the chains are actually quite slack between the dragon and the rearmost pullers. Oh, and the timelines didn't quite add up either. But that has been extensively covered in this thread already. All I could contribute at this point was a bit of cable theory.
  9. I can only imagine all the training that lay behind that one shot. Imagine how many training shots the Night King needs to have taken to be able to throw that accurately. On the tundra, day in and day out, throwing javelins at wighted birds or whatever. Maybe he had pulled a tendon a couple of times and had to rest for a few weeks, before going back out to the range. I can imagine his early throws going wildly off target, the stupid bird flying in figure 8s above the range, the javelin landing nowhere near it. How many days did the Night's King throw his icicle to the ground and stomp angrily to the wardrobe for a long, nice, cold shower? How many times did he slip and fall, or flunk his throw? How many icy swear words has he shouted after missing by only centimetres due to an erratic gust of wind? How great was his hit percentage before he decided to call his training sufficient to hit a dragon-sized target? Does he practise with tree branches or other javelins every day while on the march? Is that why they only had 2-3 javelins left? And I wonder if that other guy who handed him the javelin has been his caddie for long, or how that arrangement came to be? They didn't seem to verbally communicate, so the caddie must have learned to read his boss' subtle movements for "bring me a javelin, size 4, I think". Did he compliment his master for a well-thrown shot? Or comfort him after he missed Drogon? Or has he learned from experience to keep his tongue tied when his master throws a bad shot? Since there were only a handful of javelins left, did he have to go pick up the one that missed?
  10. That zombie bear was hacked apart, battered, and even set on fire. It kept on fighting. One prick with the obsidian dagger, though, and it fell to the ground like a sack of ash. In a universe of consistent logic, mass arrow fire with obsidian arrows would bring a wighted dragon down in seconds. Keep in mind that their effective fire-spewing range is a lot shorter than the range of a longbow (some 50 meters or so, apparently depending on the needs of the scene). A scorpion hit like the one Bronn scored on Drogon would cause the dragon to fall apart in mid-air, possibly without even slowing the bolt down. As for defeating the army of the dead, daggers like used in the show seems like the wrong way to go. Even arrowheads would be suboptimal. If they want to truly stop the dead, they need to make obsidian caltrops. Find a chokepoint, scatter caltrops with catapults, bait the army into rushing forward. For every pricked foot, a warrior drops inert to the ground. Advanced strategies would involve obsidian-tipped barbed wire, strung out at face height or in concertina arrangements so the mounds of dead bodies won't create a footbridge across the "mine"field. The good ol' Saddam strategy might work well too, the wights have proven stupid enough to walk into deadly obstacles by the hundreds before sensing the danger, but I don't think Westeros has any oil fields to set ablaze.
  11. The thread title asks "Who or what will die beyond the Wall". For this particular mission, logic died on Dragonstone. "Let's send our dearest and most valuable men, including our top three military commanders, beyond the Wall - alone - to personally capture a wight we could show to Cersei, that would surely convince her to agree to an armistice!" This proposal was not meant with a "What, no!", or an "Are you drunk?", or "I can think of a million other plans we could try first", or even a "Good idea, but uh, how exactly are the logistics going to work out there?". Heck, even a "Let's bring a sled we can lash the captured wight to!" might have saved logic to some degree. But no, six valuable men on foot with no equipment to speak of was the plan they went with. Logic was well and soundly dead long before they got to the Wall.
  12. There's an enemy fortress and fleet parked right in the middle of the only sea route out of King's Landing, which is the only proper port on the east coast of Westeros that the Iron Throne controls. That's normally a very effective blockade that would make it impossible to transport any large amount of gold to Braavos, or to sellsword companies. If that logistical challenge is never brought up (actually, it is explicitly ignored, since we've seen Euron use the route past Dragonstone at least three times after Daenerys took it), it's safe to assume that a lot of things will be lumped into that blind spot too.
  13. I'd say everybody, apart from Jon. This whole expedition reeks of the writers' need to: Show the viewers how dangerous the Army of the Dead is (even though main characters have trekked up and down the continent multiple times in the time it took this army to march on the Wall). Create some action scenes north of the Wall, for whatever flimsy reason. Kill off a few named characters, both to cut loose threads and for the shock value of lots of beloved characters dying. So I guess Beric and Thoros are toast (well, to the extent icy wights can "toast" anything), they have no purpose in the final five-or-so episodes that other characters can't resolve. Sandor too, he might redeem himself by sacrificing his life to save some of his companions (anyway, his only remaining purpose would be to kill the reanimated Mountain, which frankly is a job that could be done just as nicely by others). Jorah needs to get out of the way too, so a love triangle won't eat too much of Daenerys' screentime (five episodes left after the next, remember). Gendry was quite possibly written out of the show when he got on that rowboat, and intended never to return. But the writers noticed that fans noticed that he hadn't got a proper ending, and his absence was becoming memetic. So they brought him back in, so he can be killed off in a proper, definitely-the-end-of-the-character way. He is a loose thread, only brought back to be ripped out properly. That leaves Tormund to account for: I'm sorry, but I think he's toast (or, uh... slush?) too. Dead beyond the wall, in his homeland. The series previously stated that "the Wildlings went to Eastwatch", which is to say "Every remaining Wildling is at Eastwatch". Keep in mind that there is nothing left in Dorne after the Sand Snakes died, that entire region just faded away with the death of its leadership - same goes for the Reach, which is apparently nothing but Highgarden. The series has a habit of hyper-concentrating things, not as much happening on a large continent as on a sea of tiny islands. Anyway, with the Wildlings all at Eastwatch, left a faceless group with their leader dead, the Wall looming above them, and a huge Plot Point army on the other side? There is no way this won't end with the Wall falling, and a subsequent massacre. Time will tell whether Davos dies in that battle too. I'd also throw in Benjen there somewhere. Not sure if he lives or dies or turns evil. But there's no way he won't be there.