Osha a self-sacrifice as part of the GNC?

[Juggzy]

Quote

1 hour ago, Juggzy said:

It makes no narrative sense for the Umbers suddenly to betray the Starks,  None.  Their loyalty has been foreshadowed, as has the GNC ('The North remembers').  Remember that Ramsay kills Osha because of what Theon told him.  When SmallJon handed Osha and Rickon over, he would not have known what Theon told Ramsay. I think the killing of Osha was not expected - she was sent there as an assassin. 

No, I disagree. It makes even less sense for the Umbers to hand over Rickon, the last male Stark heir (as far as they know), to Ramsay if they were planning on double crossing the Boltons. Zero sense. The Umbers handing over Rickon is one of those situations the show creates often (lazy writing, poor plotting) where either alternative makes no sense whatsoever. 

And I disagree with you.  It makes no sense for the Umbers suddenly to betray the Starks.  Some form of the GNC has been signalled throughout the show and the books and there has been no signalling of an Umber betrayal.  What we do know is that the show might 'short circuit' the books, but it never produces a plot line completely at odds with the books, which is what Umber support of the Starks would be.  What we are about to get it a GNC-lite plotline.  Furthermore, to have the Umbers stay with Ramsay then betray him on the battlefield would actually mimic some of the Wars of the Roses, and we all know that that was one of GRR's major sources.  

There are two ways tha the members of the GNC could see this working out:

1. If the Umbers and the GNC were expecting to have to put Ramsay to siege then it makes sense to hand Osha and Rickon over so that they have someone inside the castle to open the gates for them.

2. If the Umbers and the GNC want to try and trick RAmsay into making himself vulnerable, they plan to have Ramsay believe that he has an army so that his army is present on the battlefield, and have that assumed alliance turn in the middle of the battle to slaughter the now by far-outnumbered Bolton Army.  This is the route that I expect the show to go.  If this is what they are up to, how best to convince RAmsay?  Give him his hostage, knowing that you will rescue that hostage by the battlefield subterfuge. I honestly don't think SmallJon thought that Osha would get killed - as I say, they don't know that Theon has been tortured and blabbed.  

[Conchobar]

On 16/05/2016 at 1:35 PM, Benedict Oathkeeper said:

Theory ...

SmallJon Umber brings Osha, Rickon and a large wolf head to Winterfell, as part of the wider northern conspiracy/rebellion against the Boltons. It's a risk but with the Boltons having the upper hand it is viewed as a risk worth taking.  SmallJon's plan, agreed (reluctantly by Rickon) and the Manderleys etc. is to bring Osha and Rickon to Ramsey knowing that Ramsey will first butcher Osha before killing or torturing Rickon (that is his nature).  The inevitable butchery of Osha is the moment the plan is executed.  Not sure exactly how this will happen but as Osha is being killed, Rickon is being sprung, probably via Winterfell crypts.  SmallJon has written the pink letter (borrowed this idea from another thread, thanks) and this interweaves with the Osha/Rickon plan in that it has the possibility of achieving success and saving Rickon, too, whilst marching on Winterfell with Ramsey and Rickon inside seems to have very little chance of success and no chance of Rickon surviving.  This explains why any northern family would allow Rickon to be handed over - a small chance of victory at great odds seems quite Stark-like.

Rickon's escape draws Ramsey out of Winterfell, the fact he has lost two captive Starks makes him as mad as an otter and any semblance of strategy and the logical martial correctness of staying in Winterfell (already mentioned by Roose on the show) deserts him. Boom.  

1. Northerners are great

2. Ramsey's goose is cooked 

3. Jon and Sansa retake Winterfell and Rickon is not dog-meat

 ... a brief Winterfell party ensues (not sure how we get Arya or Bran an invite) before the battle for the dawn begins ... 

Come on D&D, you know you want to ...

Thoughts?

There is no Northern conspiracy. I am sorry. The Umbers would not have risked Rickon, period, if they were planning something. Smalljon just isn't as loyal to the Starks as his father was.

[Juggzy]

16 minutes ago, Conchobar said:

There is no Northern conspiracy. I am sorry. The Umbers would not have risked Rickon, period, if they were planning something. Smalljon just isn't as loyal to the Starks as his father was.

We'll see.  Feel free to mock and jeer if I am wrong; obviously, I'll be doing similar to you if outcomes prove you wrong. 

[kissdbyfire]

34 minutes ago, Juggzy said:

And I disagree with you.  It makes no sense for the Umbers suddenly to betray the Starks.  Some form of the GNC has been signalled throughout the show and the books and there has been no signalling of an Umber betrayal.  What we do know is that the show might 'short circuit' the books, but it never produces a plot line completely at odds with the books, which is what Umber support of the Starks would be.  What we are about to get it a GNC-lite plotline.  Furthermore, to have the Umbers stay with Ramsay then betray him on the battlefield would actually mimic some of the Wars of the Roses, and we all know that that was one of GRR's major sources.  

There are two ways tha the members of the GNC could see this working out:

1. If the Umbers and the GNC were expecting to have to put Ramsay to siege then it makes sense to hand Osha and Rickon over so that they have someone inside the castle to open the gates for them.

2. If the Umbers and the GNC want to try and trick RAmsay into making himself vulnerable, they plan to have Ramsay believe that he has an army so that his army is present on the battlefield, and have that assumed alliance turn in the middle of the battle to slaughter the now by far-outnumbered Bolton Army.  This is the route that I expect the show to go.  If this is what they are up to, how best to convince RAmsay?  Give him his hostage, knowing that you will rescue that hostage by the battlefield subterfuge. I honestly don't think SmallJon thought that Osha would get killed - as I say, they don't know that Theon has been tortured and blabbed.  

Well, I guess we will have to agree to disagree and wait for it to unfold. We can come back to it later. 

A couple of things...

1st bold: WHAT? 

2nd bold: No, in my opinion it makes no sense whatsoever to deliver the last male Stark heir if you're planning to double cross Ramsay. If that were the case, they could and should have given Ramsay a FAKE Rickon, there, no risk of having the actual heir and last surviving son (as far as they know) of Eddard Stark killed by the mad psycho they all know Ramsay to be. 

[Juggzy]

Just now, kissdbyfire said:

Well, I guess we will have to agree to disagree and wait for it to unfold. We can come back to it later. 

A couple of things...

1st bold: WHAT? 

2nd bold: No, in my opinion it makes no sense whatsoever to deliver the last male Stark heir if you're planning to double cross Ramsay. If that were the case, they could and should have given Ramsay a FAKE Rickon, there, no risk of having the actual heir and last surviving son (as far as they know) of Eddard Stark killed by the mad psycho they all know Ramsay to be. 

1. No character has been completely the opposite, acting in an opposite way to their narrative significance in the books. 

2. Whatevs.  We'll see.  But I still don't think you're right.

[LadySoftheart]

7 minutes ago, Juggzy said:

1. No character has been completely the opposite, acting in an opposite way to their narrative significance in the books. 

1. Ellaria Sand would beg to differ. And Jaime Lannister. And Sansa Stark. And Stannis Baratheon. And Brienne of Tarth. That's just off the top of my head.

Book Ellaria - pleads for peace and an end to the bloody cycle of vengeance; Show Ellaria - calls for war, murders her lover's brother to avenge Oberyn.

Book Jaime - decides to keep his vows, distances himself from Cersei, burns her letter asking for help, thinks about how he has to face her "if she isn't dead." Show Jaime - doesn't care about his vows, completely committed to Cersei and Tywin's legacy, doesn't care about anyone but "you and I."

Book Sansa - learning the game of thrones in the Vale; unmarried and not raped by anyone; kind and compassionate to Sweetrobin. Show Sansa - married for revenge (???); raped by Ramsay; taking back what's hers with fire and blood (or something similar)

Book Stannis - tells his men to crown Shireen if anything happens to him on his march to Winterfell; Show Stannis - burns Shireen because men are starving two days march from Castle Black

Book Brienne - is kind and mentoring towards Pod; is shaken up by killing people, even when they are Bloody Mummer's and she killed in self-defense; goes into an unequal battle knowing she will probably die in order to defend the commoner children at the inn - she has no chance and no choice because her internal code of honor means she protects the weak at all costs; Show Brienne - forgets her mission to protect Sansa in order to avenge Renly; kills a wounded and defenseless man (not just Stannis but she keeps doing it) without any remorse.

When characters are literally doing the opposite of their book characterization, then QED they are also not fulfilling their narrative significance.

[kissdbyfire]

Very well said, @LadySoftheart.

[Tianzi]

2 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

No, I disagree. It makes even less sense for the Umbers to hand over Rickon, the last male Stark heir (as far as they know), to Ramsay if they were planning on double crossing the Boltons. Zero sense. The Umbers handing over Rickon is one of those situations the show creates often (lazy writing, poor plotting) where either alternative makes no sense whatsoever. 

The funny thing? Ramsay didn't even know it was Rickon before they threw in the wolf head, so they really could give him a completely random boy. Just to keep the leverage themselves, in case something happens.

[Westerosi Coast Gangster]

there is no GNC. at least in the show, the books is possible. unless your going to have 2 characters play everyone who is suss posed to be involved in it.

[kissdbyfire]

5 minutes ago, Tianzi said:

The funny thing? Ramsay didn't even know it was Rickon before they threw in the wolf head, so they really could give him a completely random boy. Just to keep the leverage themselves, in case something happens.

Exactly. Which is kind of ridiculous in and of itself, the fact that Rickon and his big wild direwolf have been at the Last Hearth for years, and no one's ever heard anything about them at all. Sure, whatever. But to expect the Umbers to turn on Ramsay after having handed over their only leverage and asset is nothing more than wishful thinking. 

[Cas Stark]

There is no GNC in the show, there may not be a GNC even in the books, but in the books it is at least clear that overwhelmingly except for a couple of specific members of the Karstark family, the North supports the Starks. 

This support does not exist in the show.  The only people in the North so far who remember are the old woman red shirt and Ramsay.

They have name dropped the Manderlys several times since the end of last year and this year...so, 1+1=2.  Sansa and Jon will go to the Manderlys who will support them, there will be a battle of Manderlys/wildlings against Bolton/Umbers and LF will ride in to save the day.  Osha is already dead....Rickon is a prisoner of a mad dog....do the math.

The Starks, Sansa and Jon will retake Winterfell.  Probably somebody, Davos, when he finally gets it through his thick head that Mel betrayed his king and burned Shireen, will kill her.  Sansa will eventually dispose of LF one way or the other.

 

[Tianzi]

1 minute ago, Cas Stark said:

Sansa will eventually dispose of LF one way or the other.

If her brain time doesn't run out.

[Cas Stark]

2 minutes ago, Tianzi said:

If her brain time doesn't run out.

That eventual scene is going to be REALLY WEIRD, since Gillen has repeatedly said that LF has real feelings for Sansa, and basically that he's not that bad of a guy....so how they would play the break between them...I have no idea.  LF will be sad that Sansa doesn't understand how he killed her father, engineered her involvement in regicide and then sent her to marry a mad dog was all in her best interest...or if he will simply revert to mustache twirling villain for that particular scene.  Who knows, who really cares.

[kissdbyfire]

2 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

That eventual scene is going to be REALLY WEIRD, since Gillen has repeatedly said that LF has real feelings for Sansa, and basically that he's not that bad of a guy....so how they would play the break between them...I have no idea.  LF will be sad that Sansa doesn't understand how he killed her father, engineered her involvement in regicide and then sent her to marry a mad dog was all in her best interest...or if he will simply revert to mustache twirling villain for that particular scene.  Who knows, who really cares.

Poor misunderstood LF, rejected by YourSister, and then her daughter, and that's after saving the Starks from Ramsay. My heart weeps for him. /s

[Juggzy]

Well, if you say that is completely the opposite then I guess it must be.  

[TickTak7]

TV show GNC falls flat on it's face. 

There's no explanation that makes sense, as to why the Umbers would deliver Rickon to Ramsey. 

 

[Jack Bauer 24]

I think you really need to take off the tinfoil here. Conspiracies are outrageous in theory and I'm glad Beinoff and Weiss are cutting this fat.

[kissdbyfire]

Since when is a proper, cogent and coherent plot fat? LOL

The show has made a mess with its surreal and nonsensical storylines, gigantic plot holes, all over the place timelines, and god-awful characterisations, and those are problems created by Mr Benioff and Mr Weiss poor writing. 

[Desert Fox]

I tend to believe it's part of a ruse, but not a grand conspiracy. Reasons why:

• the timing is suspicious. Smalljon just happens to join team Bolton when Ramsay goes full retard and kills his father? When Ramsay is hated by all? When Ramsay lost Sansa? They've had Rickon for years. I think the Umbers and Rickon are making their move when Ramsay is at his weakest. If Ramsay has several years to get the other houses in line, then Rickon is screwed. If Ramsay takes Castle Black to go find Sansa, Rickon is screwed.
• there are plenty of easier ways for the show to get Rickon captured than for the most loyal of stark bannermen to turncoat. If the show just needed a reason for Jon to attack Winterfell, Ramsay could have captured him in a bunch of different ways. Why bother to make the Umbers traitors?
• in the books there is an element of Umber trickery. Umbers under Hother pretty clearly mean to betray the Boltons. They may even be the key to breaching Winterfell (by opening the gates or letting the attackers climb up unmolested). I could the show modifying this into the current storyline.
• why give over Rickon period? Even if you hate the Stark, having the rightful Lord of Winterfell as a hostage would provide safety from Ramsay's wrath forever. Hand him over, Ramsay carves him up, and then he's free to betray you later. This is a man who killed his own father. How could you trust him?
• refusing to bend the knee and swear to Ramsay is a huge sign that something isn't up. People who don't care about vows, would take that oath without a second thought.

So why be so stupid to turn over the Prince in the North to the Starks biggest enemy and a huge psycho? That is a tougher question. You gain trust and access. Osha tried killing Ramsay. Maybe that was the plan. Maybe the plan is for Umbers to march with the Boltons to war against Jon, and then turn on them suddenly causing a rout.  Is it risky? Sure, but waiting around means the end of the Starks. Ramsay will only grow stronger. It might be a ploy to get the North off it's ass. Fighting to crown a boy is a hard sell, but rescuing the prince from a mad man isn't. 

And Ramsay has to be a little careful with Rickon. If he kills him in cold blood, the north may rise up against him.

The obvious counter argument is that it's a huge fucking risk. Which it is. But Umber and Rickon might be willing to roll the dice. It's a wild plan, but Smalljon and Rickon are wild men.

Why I think it isn't a grand conspiracy? The Northern houses don't seem to be able to do shit without a Stark running things. If they had many houses coordinating, they wouldn't have done such a risky plan.

[Cas Stark]

1 minute ago, Desert Fox said:

I tend to believe it's part of a ruse, but not a grand conspiracy. Reasons why:

• the timing is suspicious. Smalljon just happens to join team Bolton when Ramsay goes full retard and kills his father? When Ramsay is hated by all? When Ramsay lost Sansa? They've had Rickon for years. I think the Umbers and Rickon are making their move when Ramsay is at his weakest. If Ramsay has several years to get the other houses in line, then Rickon is screwed. If Ramsay takes Castle Black to go find Sansa, Rickon is screwed.
• there are plenty of easier ways for the show to get Rickon captured than for the most loyal of stark bannermen to turncoat. If the show just needed a reason for Jon to attack Winterfell, Ramsay could have captured him in a bunch of different ways. Why bother to make the Umbers traitors?
• in the books there is an element of Umber trickery. Umbers under Hother pretty clearly mean to betray the Boltons. They may even be the key to breaching Winterfell (by opening the gates or letting the attackers climb up unmolested). I could the show modifying this into the current storyline.
• why give over Rickon period? Even if you hate the Stark, having the rightful Lord of Winterfell as a hostage would provide safety from Ramsay's wrath forever. Hand him over, Ramsay carves him up, and then he's free to betray you later. This is a man who killed his own father. How could you trust him?
• refusing to bend the knee and swear to Ramsay is a huge sign that something isn't up. People who don't care about vows, would take that oath without a second thought.

So why be so stupid to turn over the Prince in the North to the Starks biggest enemy and a huge psycho? That is a tougher question. You gain trust and access. Osha tried killing Ramsay. Maybe that was the plan. Maybe the plan is for Umbers to march with the Boltons to war against Jon, and then turn on them suddenly causing a rout.  Is it risky? Sure, but waiting around means the end of the Starks. Ramsay will only grow stronger. It might be a ploy to get the North off it's ass. Fighting to crown a boy is a hard sell, but rescuing the prince from a mad man isn't. 

And Ramsay has to be a little careful with Rickon. If he kills him in cold blood, the north may rise up against him.

The obvious counter argument is that it's a huge fucking risk. Which it is. But Umber and Rickon might be willing to roll the dice.

Why I think it isn't a grand conspiracy? The Northern houses don't seem to be able to do shit without a Stark running things. If they had many houses coordinating, they wouldn't have done such a risky plan.

In which case, if the plan was that a lone wildling woman was going to ever be able to kill Ramsay, who just killed his entire family....and that despite Ramsay having no way in hell to verify if they're giving him the real Rickon or a fake Rickon since they killed the direwolf...LOL...that makes them incredibly stupid.

Now, since a lot people in the show are stupid and do really stupid things, it's not out of the realm of possibility that the Show Umbers will betray the Boltons, but it's pretty stupid even for the show, which already established that Ramsay has no idea if it's really Rickon or not, so why not then give him a fake...or again, why give him Rickon at all? And they are again giving a hugely valuable hostage to someone and getting nothing in return for it except some promises.

How does waiting around mean the end of the Starks?  If you are the Umbers and you know the Boltons need you...why not wait them out, or backstab them and then you can later yourself take control of the North because you've got the Stark.  Without the Stark they have nothing, Ramsay could easily betray them, why not?  They already gave up their leverage.