(Spoilers) So - which events from the show will happen in the books and in what way?

[Cas Stark]

35 minutes ago, Faint said:

I disagree as to your first point. I believe Melisandre will think Stannis is dead and burn Shireen to revive Jon Snow at which time she will already believe he is Azor Ahai. Melisandre burning Shireen for better weather strikes me as an invention of the show to avoid weighing down their audience with the cost of reviving Jon Snow. 

And you are simply wrong as to your second point. The Red Temple has temple prostitutes.  See here.  Moreover, Melisandre herself tells us she has a tear shaped tattoo (i.e., "Melony," she heard a woman cry.  A man's voice called, "Lot Seven."  She was weeping, and her tears were flame.)

I understand many a reader wants definite, explicit confirmations for anything and everything, but Martin simply does not write like that. 

He is not going to have Melisandre think "I was a temple sex slave at the Red Temple in Volantis and was branded with a tear shaped tattoo," even though she clearly was. 

I agree, Mel revives Jon, that's why she's at CB.  I lean toward her burning Shireen, but we don't know how long Stannis lives, it's possible he lives long enough to recoordinate his forces and his family and then burns her himself, though I suspect it''s Mel doing it.  I always thought Jon's body being burned and him reviving that way was a really silly theory. I also agree about Mel's back story

I'm surprised more people don't consider Bran leaving the cave as a real spoiler.  I was never convinced he would leave, and it always felt like opinion was fairly mixed on this.

[Faint]

2 hours ago, Newstar said:

It's funny as the show unfolds that most of the supposed "book spoilers" are things that the book fans have treated as all but confirmed for years: . . . Bran leaving the cave . . . 

I am not sure how widespread this belief is but this is something I did not expect myself and am wondering whether this development follows the books. The only plausible explanation I can come up with that entails Bran leaving the cave is him taking control of someone else's body, be it Hodor's, Meera's, or somebody else (or perhaps even multiple people). I am not altogether certain readers will like that. Absent that plot twist though, I am drawing a blank as to how Bran can truly leave the cave. That being said, there is certainly quite a bit of groundwork for the body snatching theory. 

[Protagoras]

3 hours ago, Newstar said:

It's funny as the show unfolds that most of the supposed "book spoilers" are things that the book fans have treated as all but confirmed for years: Shireen being sacrificed, Jon being resurrected, Bran leaving the cave, Rickon dying or being irrelevant, etc. It may be in the end result that very little of what happens in the show that seems to "spoil" the books is shocking or even surprising to book readers.

I have been stalking these forums for many years and I can tell you that such confirmations where the fans are 90+% agreed are extremely rare. There are some things, granted - like R+L=J, Jons resurrection and Sandor the gravedigger, but you are presenting things as confirmed by fans with no basis whatsoever. Shireen being sacrificed? Nope - only a couple of persons. Rickon dying or being irrelevant? A larger group, but far from the unity you describe.

This is a clear example of a recreation of the past in order to present us as a group and you as an individual as sages. Yet in order to do so you need to show that these ideas (Shireen/Rickon) was held by a large group of people, and I don´t think you can. Sure, many people write when they see a theory "Great, this is how it must be", but they do so in several different threads with conflicting agenda.

You can´t pick several theories and score points from them if 1 out of those 4-5 should be correct. Is what happens in the show shocking? surprising? No - but its certainly not confirmed things everyone agree on either.

[Lord_Ravenstone]

2 hours ago, Faint said:

I disagree as to your first point. I believe Melisandre will think Stannis is dead and burn Shireen to revive Jon Snow at which time she will already believe he is Azor Ahai. Melisandre burning Shireen for better weather strikes me as an invention of the show to avoid weighing down their audience with the cost of reviving Jon Snow. 

And you are simply wrong as to your second point. The Red Temple has temple prostitutes.  See here.  Moreover, Melisandre herself tells us she has a tear shaped tattoo (i.e., "Melony," she heard a woman cry.  A man's voice called, "Lot Seven."  She was weeping, and her tears were flame.)

I understand many a reader wants definite, explicit confirmations for anything and everything, but Martin simply does not write like that. 

He is not going to have Melisandre think "I was a temple sex slave at the Red Temple in Volantis and was branded with a tear shaped tattoo," even though she clearly was. 

Stannis not burning Shireen himself weakens the story and the tragedy of it all. Love versus duty. 

I think we'll get Stannis burning Shireen for a stone dragon at Winterfell when he's facing down the Others

Jon's revival doesn't need a sacrifice besides maybe Ghost's since he's stuck in there 

Melisandre is a priestess. She should have flames tattooed across her face.

 

[Stag_legion]

5 hours ago, Lord_Ravenstone said:

Stannis not burning Shireen himself weakens the story and the tragedy of it all. Love versus duty. 

I think we'll get Stannis burning Shireen for a stone dragon at Winterfell when he's facing down the Others

Jon's revival doesn't need a sacrifice besides maybe Ghost's since he's stuck in there 

Melisandre is a priestess. She should have flames tattooed across her face.

 

I disagree. Stannis burning Shireen would weaken his story because it would be irrational and out of character for stannis. For all the talk about duty, stannis would still not sacrifice the future of his dynasty, for the very reason that keeping his line alive is a part of the duty he seeks to fulfill. He explicitly says this in the books.

Stannis' story already has plenty of tragedy without stannis directly killing his daughter. Not everything in the story has to be dialed to 11 and mirror exaggerated greek myths. Stannis learning about the death  of his daughter and knowing that his trust in Melisandre indirectly caused it, will be a much more apt scenario for Stannis.

[lancerman]

6 minutes ago, Stag_legion said:

I disagree. Stannis burning Shireen would weaken his story because it would be irrational and out of character for stannis. For all the talk about duty, stannis would still not sacrifice the future of his dynasty, for the very reason that keeping his line alive is a part of the duty he seeks to fulfill. He explicitly says this in the books.

Stannis' story already has plenty of tragedy without stannis directly killing his daughter. Not everything in the story has to be dialed to 11 and mirror exaggerated greek myths. Stannis learning about the death  of his daughter and knowing that his trust in Melisandre indirectly caused it, will be a much more apt scenario for Stannis.

The issue with Stannis is that human sacrifice has been a constant theme in his story for quite awhile. And the build is already there with Edric.

[Stag_legion]

13 minutes ago, lancerman said:

The issue with Stannis is that human sacrifice has been a constant theme in his story for quite awhile. And the build is already there with Edric.

That will still be a theme if shireen is sacrificed without Stannis' consent. It will highlight the fact that stannis allowing previous burnings enabled a precedence that ultimately leads to his daughter burning even though he personally would have never allowed it.

 

This is also strongly supported by the TWOW chapters relating to stannis, In it stannis literally says he's willing to die to make shireen queen. It would be very inconsistent if a few chapters later stannis decides to allow his daughter to be killed

[Newstar]

9 hours ago, Protagoras said:

I have been stalking these forums for many years and I can tell you that such confirmations where the fans are 90+% agreed are extremely rare. There are some things, granted - like R+L=J, Jons resurrection and Sandor the gravedigger, but you are presenting things as confirmed by fans with no basis whatsoever. Shireen being sacrificed? Nope - only a couple of persons. Rickon dying or being irrelevant? A larger group, but far from the unity you describe.

That was my impression. Mileage varies.

2 hours ago, Stag_legion said:

That will still be a theme if shireen is sacrificed without Stannis' consent. It will highlight the fact that stannis allowing previous burnings enabled a precedence that ultimately leads to his daughter burning even though he personally would have never allowed it.

 

This is also strongly supported by the TWOW chapters relating to stannis, In it stannis literally says he's willing to die to make shireen queen. It would be very inconsistent if a few chapters later stannis decides to allow his daughter to be killed

Well, sure, but a recurring theme in ASOIAF is characters being forced by circumstances to do things, and in particular make moral compromises, that they previously considered unthinkable: Ned sacrificing his honour (to protect baby Jon and protect Sansa), Brienne selling out Jaime (to save Pod's life), Jon breaking his NW vows (to save Arya), Jaime breaking his Kingsguard oath (to save King's Landing), etc. etc. Stannis is adamantly in favour of Shireen becoming queen and is just as strongly against any further burnings now. Will he be able to adhere to that hard line when things get really desperate? If Ned and Brienne, two characters far more moral than Stannis who tossed out their morals when push came to shove, are any indication, and if D&D are telling the truth when they insinuate that Stannis does order Shireen's burning in the books, the answer is no.

Also, while we're talking about moral compromises, ASOIAF Stannis arranged for his own brother's murder and was considering sacrificing his nephew. He's not Ned Stark and he never has been. And really, from a literary perspective, what is the sacrifice of Renly (in service of Stannis' ambition) and the almost-sacrifice of Edric Storm (an innocent child directly related by blood to Stannis) supposed to be setting up if not the ultimate sacrifice for Stannis' ambition?

[Lord_Ravenstone]

1 hour ago, Newstar said:

That was my impression. Mileage varies.

Well, sure, but a recurring theme in ASOIAF is characters being forced by circumstances to do things, and in particular make moral compromises, that they previously considered unthinkable: Ned sacrificing his honour (to protect baby Jon and protect Sansa), Brienne selling out Jaime (to save Pod's life), Jon breaking his NW vows (to save Arya), Jaime breaking his Kingsguard oath (to save King's Landing), etc. etc. Stannis is adamantly in favour of Shireen becoming queen and is just as strongly against any further burnings now. Will he be able to adhere to that hard line when things get really desperate? If Ned and Brienne, two characters far more moral than Stannis who tossed out their morals when push came to shove, are any indication, and if D&D are telling the truth when they insinuate that Stannis does order Shireen's burning in the books, the answer is no.

Also, while we're talking about moral compromises, ASOIAF Stannis arranged for his own brother's murder and was considering sacrificing his nephew. He's not Ned Stark and he never has been. And really, from a literary perspective, what is the sacrifice of Renly (in service of Stannis' ambition) and the almost-sacrifice of Edric Storm (an innocent child directly related by blood to Stannis) supposed to be setting up if not the ultimate sacrifice for Stannis' ambition?

The result is right but the logic is faulty. 

I don't Stannis did order the murder of Renly although he certainly believed he was going to die because Melisandre told him to. 

And I think pegging it on Stannis' ambition is a misreading. Stannis has ambition but the struggle is supposed to be between duty and love not ambition and love.

[Stag_legion]

55 minutes ago, Newstar said:

That was my impression. Mileage varies.

Well, sure, but a recurring theme in ASOIAF is characters being forced by circumstances to do things, and in particular make moral compromises, that they previously considered unthinkable: Ned sacrificing his honour (to protect baby Jon and protect Sansa), Brienne selling out Jaime (to save Pod's life), Jon breaking his NW vows (to save Arya), Jaime breaking his Kingsguard oath (to save King's Landing), etc. etc. Stannis is adamantly in favour of Shireen becoming queen and is just as strongly against any further burnings now. Will he be able to adhere to that hard line when things get really desperate? If Ned and Brienne, two characters far more moral than Stannis who tossed out their morals when push came to shove, are any indication, and if D&D are telling the truth when they insinuate that Stannis does order Shireen's burning in the books, the answer is no.

Also, while we're talking about moral compromises, ASOIAF Stannis arranged for his own brother's murder and was considering sacrificing his nephew. He's not Ned Stark and he never has been. And really, from a literary perspective, what is the sacrifice of Renly (in service of Stannis' ambition) and the almost-sacrifice of Edric Storm (an innocent child directly related by blood to Stannis) supposed to be setting up if not the ultimate sacrifice for Stannis' ambition?

Killing Renly was not a sacrifice, Stannis consented to Renly's assassination because they were at war and he saw no other way. Its entirely unlike Edric Storm's case.

Stannis was willing to consider Edric's sacrifice because it wasn't going to lead to the extinction of his line. But sacrificing Shireen would defeat the whole purpose of stannis fighting for the throne. Stannis is fighting for the throne because its his duty to his family as well as the realm. wiping out his family to get the throne would make it all pointless.

D&D didn't say "GRRM told us stannis kills shireen", they said in very vague terms that the GRRM told them about the death of shireen, there is nothing explicitly said about whether stannis is the one to order in the books.

All the talk about stannis killing shireen is purely based on the show, and if ADWD hadn't been released before the show, lots people would have also thought Sansa was going to winterfell and would get raped by ramsay in the books too. The show is full of non sense by this point, and stannis burning shireen is one of them

[Lord_Ravenstone]

4 hours ago, Stag_legion said:

I disagree. Stannis burning Shireen would weaken his story because it would be irrational and out of character for stannis. For all the talk about duty, stannis would still not sacrifice the future of his dynasty, for the very reason that keeping his line alive is a part of the duty he seeks to fulfill. He explicitly says this in the books.

Stannis' story already has plenty of tragedy without stannis directly killing his daughter. Not everything in the story has to be dialed to 11 and mirror exaggerated greek myths. Stannis learning about the death  of his daughter and knowing that his trust in Melisandre indirectly caused it, will be a much more apt scenario for Stannis.

Well what do you think is more important to Stannis, the future of his dynasty or the safety of the realm?

I think it speaks to the strength of his character if he picks the realm

he'd basically be the person that Varys pretends to be

[Stag_legion]

1 minute ago, Lord_Ravenstone said:

Well what do you think is more important to Stannis, the future of his dynasty or the realm?

I think it speaks to the strength of his character if he picks the realm

he'd basically be the person that Varys pretends to be

To stannis the two are like food and water. He wouldn't be willing to give up either. and foregoing one for the other would be complete failure in stannis' mind.

Stannis is prepared to sacrifice himself for the realm, but not the future of his family.

Some people have a very one dimensional view of stannis as this guy who would sacrifice everything in his life for his quest. but as the series as shown there are limits to what stannis is willing to do. He wasn't willing to sacrifice claw island for his war effort. 

[Lord_Ravenstone]

3 minutes ago, Stag_legion said:

To stannis the two are like food and water. He wouldn't be willing to give up either. and foregoing one for the other would be complete failure in stannis' mind.

Stannis is prepared to sacrifice himself for the realm, but not the future of his family.

Some people have a very one dimensional view of stannis as this guy who would sacrifice everything in his life for his quest. but as the series as shown there are limits to what stannis is willing to do. He wasn't willing to sacrifice claw island for his war effort. 

Stannis is smart enough to realize that razing an island isn't going to get him anything but vengeance on people who don't deserve it 

we're talking about what would in his mind save the world 

I do agree that when he does sacrifice Shireen that he'll view it as a complete failure and hate himself but Stannis is one of the few people strong enough to sacrifice what he loves for his duty 

[Stag_legion]

11 minutes ago, Lord_Ravenstone said:

Stannis is smart enough to realize that razing an island isn't going to get him anything but vengeance on people who don't deserve it 

we're talking about what would in his mind save the world 

I do agree that when he does sacrifice Shireen that he'll view it as a complete failure and hate himself but Stannis is one of the few people strong enough to sacrifice what he loves for his duty 

Seem more like some readers would like stannis to behave in this way. Its almost like many would be disappointed if stannis doesn't go all the way with "duty above all else". Some going as far as saying if stannis doesn't sacrifice Shireen it would ruin his storyline. 

To me that just seems like an aversion to nuance in a character and a preference for rigid characters who are defined by a single exaggerated characteristic.

[Lord_Ravenstone]

10 minutes ago, Stag_legion said:

Seem more like some readers would like stannis to behave in this way. Its almost like many would be disappointed if stannis doesn't go all the way with "duty above all else". Some going as far as saying if stannis doesn't sacrifice Shireen it would ruin his storyline. 

To me that just seems like an aversion to nuance in a character and a preference for rigid characters who are defined by a single exaggerated characteristic.

It's not like I want him to do this without a single thought. 

He'll struggle with it but that's what GRRM likes to write about. The human heart in conflict with himself.

And as horrible as it is, thematically it'd be interesting to see Stannis do what Ned and Jon Snow failed at 

[Stag_legion]

14 minutes ago, Lord_Ravenstone said:

It's not like I want him to do this without a single thought. 

He'll struggle with it but that's what GRRM likea to write about. The human heart in conflict with himself.

And as horrible as it is, thematically it'd be interesting to see Stannis do what Ned and Jon Snow failed at 

Stannis already did this with Edric Storm though. Stannis was willing to put duty to the realm over the life of an innocent boy who happened to be related to him. Its already been done. It would be a retread for stannis to sacrifice Shireen and a retread that doesn't make sense and goes against stannis' character.

Does stannis have to kill someone related to him for your interest in this theme to be satiated? So I guess if stannis also had a son as well he should have killed him too, to fully realize the theme you guys want him to go for.

[Lord_Ravenstone]

1 hour ago, Stag_legion said:

Stannis already did this with Edric Storm though. Stannis was willing to put duty to the realm over the life of an innocent boy who happened to be related to him. Its already been done. It would be a retread for stannis to sacrifice Shireen and a retread that doesn't make sense and goes against stannis' character.

Does stannis have to kill someone related to him for your interest in this theme to be satiated? So I guess if stannis also had a son as well he should have killed him too, to fully realize the theme you guys want him to go for.

Except Stannis never chose to burn Edric. Davos took the choice out of his hands and the fate of the world didn't feel like it was on his his shoulders at that very moment because he was still skeptical of what Melisandre said. If he saw the Others with his own eyes then he'd be persuaded more

GRRM merely gave us a reprieve of what's to come.

Anyways Stannis' plotline with Edric was merely set up for Shireen's burning so when it happens you know it'll be completely in-character 

Example here:

Stannis ground his teeth again. "I never asked for this crown. Gold is cold and heavy on the head, but so long as I am the king, I have a duty . . . If I must sacrifice one child to the flames to save a million from the dark . . . Sacrifice . . . is never easy, Davos. Or it is no true sacrifice. Tell him, my lady."

Stannis would sacrifice a kid if he thought it was necessary to save Westeros

His duty as a king trumps his duty as a father and to his dynasty

"I know the cost! Last night, gazing into that hearth, I saw things in the flames as well. I saw a king, a crown of fire on his brows, burning . . . burning, Davos. His own crown consumed his flesh and turned him into ash. Do you think I need Melisandre to tell me what that means? Or you?" The king moved, so his shadow fell upon King's Landing. "If Joffrey should die . . . what is the life of one bastard boy against a kingdom?"

There's a couple ways of reading this. The crown will end up killing him or his duty as a king will consume his very person because it'll be too much for him to handle

yeah it sucks and I want Stannis to have his life stop sucking but the dark tide is coming.

And maybe Stannis will live to the end of the books, but GRRM unquestionably wants Stannis to live as miserably as possible 

[The Great and Mighty Poo]

Nothing

[Ser Gareth]

On ‎14‎/‎05‎/‎2016 at 7:28 AM, Lord_Ravenstone said:

Well what do you think is more important to Stannis, the future of his dynasty or the safety of the realm?

I think it speaks to the strength of his character if he picks the realm

he'd basically be the person that Varys pretends to be

Neither.  Stannis is about duty, or at least that's what he has convinced himself.  Robert was King.  He is next in line and therefore has to be King (even if he doesn't actually want to be).  He has been persuaded (by Mel) that he is the Prince that was promised.  He now sees that as his destiny and has a duty to fulfil it.

I personally don't think the burning of Shireen will be as cut and dry as the show.  I think it will also have something to do with her grayscale.  By the time she gets burned I am expecting that Connington has brought an epidemic with him and it may well be that Stannis needs the Wildlings but they'll refuse to march with him because of his "unclean" daughter.  Otherwise why the Val foreshadowing?

I'm still undecided whether Stannis will defeat the Bolton's at Winterfell or be sent packing.  I don't think he'll die at Winterfell though. but his role in the show has been taken over by Jon Snow much earlier than in the books (I don't think Jon will be resurrected until the very end of TWOW).

[JonSnowed]

Jon's resurrection - will be very similar I feel (although Davos won't be there), clear it's Mel who brings him back though, also note they have known about this scene for two seasons after a discussion with GRRM.

Ramsay/Roose - Yes this is very likely in my opinion although the way it goes down will be different

Rickon - this is the area they have space for divergence as Rickon is a 3rd tier character so there is clearly more flexibility.

Dorne - is well off book but these are some of the worst chapters anyway in my opinion.

Iron Islands - Seems to be following AFFC although looks lihe they switch Asha/Yara or Victorian in the show.

Stannis - I think he's dead in Winds as much as some don't want to accept that.

Tyrion - they have simply sped up his arrival and given him some of Barristan's arc in defending Meereen until Dany returns.

Dany - This looks what I expect from Winds.

Theon - I don't see him going back to the Iron Islands but I may be wrong.

Sansa - I think they are coming back on her book arc now where I think she will bring the army of the vale North in Winds to unite against the Boltons.

Jamie/Brienne - back on book arc this season and seems reasonable they will follow with Winds material but I'll wait and see still.