How can Jon be King when Bran is still alive?

[TheLastLibrarian]

2 minutes ago, purple-eyes said:

jon snow is not affected by rules. he is the destined one, the chosen one. 

bastardy and lawful claim are big deals for other people, but not for him. 

when it comes to jon snow, nothing matters.

This is why always I hated him and the extreme favouritism of the story towards Jon, first they killed the True King Stannis and gave his story to Jon and now they are making Sansa looks like a traitor because she's siding LF against Jon, she didn't like get usurped by a targaryen, she's the rightful heir

 

[blckp]

fanservice for jon snow is ridiculous in show, he never fought with WW and hardhome is fucking filler and in book he was killed because this moron asked night watchers to break their oath and follow him to fight boltons, he deserved the stabb

in book he is whinny little emo in tv show glorified moron

[Tchzaelous]

5 hours ago, queenmarg said:

How can Jon be king when Sansa is still alive? At this point, it just seems like leaders are chosen by conquest/popularity, so Bran/Arya/Sansa being alive seems pretty irrelevant.

Sansa Bolton and two dead children do not a King/Queen make.

More importantly is why is no one beheading the Oathbreaking Lord Commander of the Night's Watch? Because if they believe he came back from the dead, AND is a blood of the Stark, it makes sense to raise him as a King.

[Minuteman]

I think that people are getting a little confused on titles. Prior to the Conquest there was not a Lord of Winterfell. There was only a KitN who ruled from Winterfell. After the Conquest the KitN became demoted to Lord of Winterfell and Warden of the North. So now there is a new KitN. Maybe he'll rule from Winterfell and maybe not. Makes no real difference. After the Conquest there has been a king that rules from King's Landing. He isn't Lord of King's Landing. KL just happens to be the seat of his government. Dragonstone, where the Targs originally ruled from, became the domain of the heir and he was titled Prince of Dragonstone. So Jon can be KitN without usurping Sansa's title or inheritance rights. In fact, if he considers Sansa his heir then it would be rational that she become the Princess of Winterfell. He has already told her that she is the Lady of Winterfell and when Stannis offered he turned down lordship so as not to take Winterfell from Sansa. There doesn't seem to be any issue on this to me. Jon is KitN and Sansa is Lady of Winterfell. KitN is likely hereditary much as LoW is. But they don't need to go to the same person (e.g. the Queen of England is also Duchess of Lancaster but the titles are distinct and prior to the War of the Roses were not necessarily worn by the same person).

[rivers snow]

Fan service? The show made Jon a shadow of his book (and even prior show) self this year to create the bizarre and unnecessary Vale save (northern conspiracy would have been far cooler and book accurate). Its Littlefinger that has the plot armor and teleporter.

The Sansa-fan hate for Jon is totally misguided. The battle would have never been close if she had just told him about the Vale opp (she admitted as much and apologized for this). He was chivalrous and respectful of his sisters claim and gave her their fathers bedroom - said she should be Lady of Winterfell, and despite being named KiTN by acclamation (not inheritence) he follows thru and he gives her the title according to HBOs website. 

[HallowedMarcus]

Al this talk about if he has or not the right for Winterfell. Well let me tell you: All land in Westeros is his because John Snow is John Dragon the son of Lysana Stark and Rhaegar Targaryen, the son of Ice and Fire. He is heir to all land in Westeros. And if Bran ever comes back or in contact with any of those Lords of the North or his family he will let them know what he saw.

[Darksky]

11 hours ago, Librus said:

 

Couldn't agree more. He didn't earn what he got. It kind of peeves me really. But I would be the first to admit that everything to do with Jon in the last two episodes was fan service. I'm not a huge fan of his part in the last episode but I understand why other people like it. They aren't like me and don't get thrown off when people break their own rules and stuff like that. I really wanted to like Jon becoming king in the North. But they did it all wrong and they gave him credit to things that didn't belong to him. Plus, that is still Bran's throne he's usurping when it come right down to it and SANSA was the one that avenged the red wedding. Not Jon. Jon almost got all his bros killed like you said xD

Are you kidding?

How does Jon usurp anything when he didn't seek out to seize power? It was bestowed on him by the Lords. Jon is King by right of acclamation just like Robb was. Robb wasn't King based on birthright because Ned WASN'T King. King in the North is made, not inherited.

Sansa deserved shit for withholding crucial information regarding the Vale and contributing to the deaths of the Stark loyalists. She even admitted to her own mistake. Why can't her fans? It's ridiculous. What did she do for their cause anyway? She sent one letter wow what a daunting and life-risking task that was. She didn't do anything beyond that. She failed to rally the Northerners, she failed to assemble her own army (Jon and Davos did the work), she didn't help out with the battle strategy, she didn't fight in the battle. She was nothing more than a figurehead.

BTW I fully believe the Vale and LF would have come anyway, Sansa begging for help or not..

Bran didn't earn shit either. He can be Lord of Winterfell if he ever returns there, just like Sansa is Lady of Winterfell now. But what has he done to earn the title of King? What has he done for the North? A cripple King who cannot father heirs is not a desired option. Never is.

Jon has done a lot for the North over the years, while in the Night's Watch. And now he was the only one who actually tried to save Ned's heir, Rickon. He put his life on the line for the Stark family. Sansa just wanted revenge and Winterfell back. The Northerners see strength, nearly legendary skills, warrior spirit, determination, dedication and great potential in Jon. They are more like Dothraki and Wildlings when it comes to choosing their leaders. Jon can do a lot from the position of King in the War for the Dawn, what would Sansa be able to do as Queen? Barely anything, again she'd just be a figurehead. The plot demands Jon in a position of power, not Sansa.

The Northern  story is past this awful birthright entitlement and classicism. It's a huge progress.

People shouldn't be shocked that the writers prioritise Jon over Sansa. He is one of the Big Three, he is the way more popular one. Sansa is second-tier, her fans need to accept the fact she will always play second fiddle to a top-tier character. And yet, the writers still have made her important and gave her something to do in the show. In the books, she's less of a character. Pushed to the edge of the plot, she serves as a camera. A way to look into Littlefinger. That's her role.

[The Bear]

I think that the show didn't quite think this through and so we're trying to apply logic to something that doesn't actually have logic behind it. If D&D want to do it, they do it.

If Jon becomes the actual KotN in the books I'm sure it will be much more thoroughly explained and we will learn more about the KitN title itself.

IF it happens in the books. I wouldn't be shocked if this was a 100% show thing.

[purple-eyes]

there is will of robb in the book. 

it is different from the show. 

the show ignored a lot of things and made things way too easy, such as how sansa can marry ramsey after she married tyrion, how people did not mind that jon was a bastard, etc. 

[The Dew]

By right of conquest and acceptance?

[of man and wolf]

14 hours ago, Librus said:

 

Couldn't agree more. He didn't earn what he got. It kind of peeves me really. But I would be the first to admit that everything to do with Jon in the last two episodes was fan service. I'm not a huge fan of his part in the last episode but I understand why other people like it. They aren't like me and don't get thrown off when people break their own rules and stuff like that. I really wanted to like Jon becoming king in the North. But they did it all wrong and they gave him credit to things that didn't belong to him. Plus, that is still Bran's throne he's usurping when it come right down to it and SANSA was the one that avenged the red wedding. Not Jon. Jon almost got all his bros killed like you said xD

Arya avenged it. There were no Freys there and Roose was already gone.

[Chib]

12 hours ago, purple-eyes said:

some of you must be big fans of jon snow. 

howcome you say jon was chosen as king just because he is a warrior? and how come you say king in the north is not inherited through house stark? 

house stark were kings in the north for like 8000 years. look at their tombs. 

if jon is not the only current and abailable son of ned stark, just a warrior with another name, do you think people will stillchoose him as king? 

seriously? 

i agree with someone above. 

jon snow is not affected by rules. he is the destined one, the chosen one. 

bastardy and lawful claim are big deals for other people, but not for him. 

when it comes to jon snow, nothing matters. 

10

King in the north was an INVALID title for 300 years. The new King in the North title is not equal to the old one. King in the North before the Targ's conquer was much more legit. The new title is mostly like a declaration of dependence. It is not much legit to the rest of Westeros. When Robb was killed, the rebellion failed and there's no title to inherit from a failed rebellion. 

The biggest reason they chose Jon was because they technically had no other male warrior Stark left. It is not because they ignore the law. They simply chose the only one they have left. Bran even if they know he is alive, what can they do with him as he is clipped? King in the North is a title for War against the throne. So you expect they choose a lady who can't fight to lead them into battle? If Sansa were like Dany or Yara, I doubt that they would even look at Jon. The thing is, Sansa is not a warrior so they did not choose her. 

Yes, one big reason why Jon was chosen because it's wartime, whether he is a bastard or not, he has what they want. If this had been a peaceful time, they might have ignored him and chosen Sansa or Bran as they're trueborn. But this is a time of war and depress, sadly.

[Chib]

13 hours ago, Vuron said:

This isn't correct, either.  As someone earlier mentioned, The Lord/Lady of Winterfell is a separate title from KitN, but the KitN title can be inherited.  Nobody inherited the title from Robb because the North gave up their independece and swore fealty to the Iron Throne after he died.  If the North had decided to remain independent and continue fighting, they would have needed a king.  The North had a hereditary king up until the last Stark king bent the knee to Aegon the Conqueror.

Jon was declared KitN after he led the battle to depose the current ruler, The Boltons, who had been given rule of the North by the Iron Throne.  The North only had 2 options at that point, accept and punishment or consequences from the Crown or declare their independence and name a king.

The king didn't have to be a Stark, but Jon led the revolt and had Stark blood so tradition took over and they named him, but they could have named anyone.

Jon being king doesn't have any effect on the line of succession of Winterfell, but it could cause issues generations down the road if you get multiple lines of Starks, similar to the Targs.

 

3

In my opinion, King in the North is still not a title to be inherited because the North haven't succeeded. It would only be legit if their rebellion succeeded. And they already failed once. The way GRRMartin said that in the end, there will be someone on the Iron Throne, it seems the North will eventually kneel to the Throne again. 

Meanwhile, Lady/Lord of Winterfell is pretty much legit. So Sansa is still getting all the birthright she is entitled to, despite the fact that in the book she technically was disinherited. Robb might not be viewed as the King by some parts of Westeros, but he was still lord of Winterfell by birthright so his will about Winterfell is still pretty much legit in the book.

However, I do agree that if Jon ever had children when he's still King in the North, it might create some complication with Sansa's children or Arya's children (Bran might never have kids and Rickon will die soon in the book) if they got married eventually. Still, I am sure Jon will die in the end so the Starks if any of them survive, they don't have to worry much about who will have Winterfell in the end. 

[purple-eyes]

4 minutes ago, Chib said:

King in the north was an INVALID title for 300 years. The new King in the North title is not equal to the old one. King in the North before the Targ's conquer was much more legit. The new title is mostly like a declaration of dependence. It is not much legit to the rest of Westeros. When Robb was killed, the rebellion failed and there's no title to inherit from a failed rebellion. 

The biggest reason they chose Jon was because they technically had no other male warrior Stark left. It is not because they ignore the law. They simply chose the only one they have left. Bran even if they know he is alive, what can they do with him as he is clipped? King in the North is a title for War against the throne. So you expect they choose a lady who can't fight to lead them into battle? If Sansa were like Dany or Yara, I doubt that they would even look at Jon. The thing is, Sansa is not a warrior so they did not choose her. 

Yes, one big reason why Jon was chosen because it's wartime, whether he is a bastard or not, he has what they want. If this had been a peaceful time, they might have ignored him and chosen Sansa or Bran as they're trueborn. But this is a time of war and depress, sadly.

That is excuse honestly. If Sansa or Bran was chosen to be king/queen, Jon can still lead the Stark army.

Rhaenyra was queen but Daemon and Corlys fought the war.

Aenys was king but Maegor fought the war.

simple and easy.

The thing is, this book made a big deal about people's birthright, and how bastard is frown upon by people.

But when it comes to Jon, people are like: hey, he is Ned's son, who cares about if he is bastard, let us forget about Ned's trueborn children, let us make him king!

I understand they need to wrap up the story quickly and they need to make Jon become king since he is the hero and savior, but it is quite lame to suddenly make people behave like this. At least GRRM created the will of Robb, which make more sense than "voting".

 

 

 

 

 

[Morgana Lannister]

15 hours ago, captaindargo said:

This is why I like the idea that the Lord of Winterfell and King in the North are two separate titles. Sansa is lady of Winterfell by birthright unless Bran returns but King in the North is chosen by the Lords and Ladies of the North. I hope they make this clear on the show.  I wish they were going to show the two Stark children working together seamlessly but that's not where they are heading. 

I think once Bran gets back to Winterfell he will also talk about the threat coming from beyond the well. Bran will probably encourage them to continue to follow Jon as King. He will probably give up an lordship over Winderfell to Sansa. 

I personally would favour this separation, i.e. one Lord (or Lady) of Winterfell and the King (Queen) in the North.  The don't seem to be going this way in the show though and this leaves Sansa a little "out of a job" I guess but I am sure they have something planned for her.  Now, as for Bran, of course we know his destiny is something entirely different but, in theory, yes, if he were to turn up alive and contest the title, his claim would have to be heard... but of course ultimately "power resides where people believe it resides" and the northern Lords would have the final say or else the King/Queen would not be able to use their support.

[Chib]

11 minutes ago, purple-eyes said:

That is excuse honestly. If Sansa or Bran was chosen to be king/queen, Jon can still lead the Stark army.

Rhaenyra was queen but Daemon and Corlys fought the war.

Aenys was king but Maegor fought the war.

simple and easy.

The thing is, this book made a big deal about people's birthright, and how bastard is frown upon by people.

But when it comes to Jon, people are like: hey, he is Ned's son, who cares about if he is bastard, let us forget about Ned's trueborn children, let us make him king!

I understand they need to wrap up the story quickly and they need to make Jon become king since he is the hero and savior, but it is quite lame to suddenly make people behave like this. At least GRRM created the will of Robb, which make more sense than "voting".

 

 

2

This is not excuse , their only choice was Jon, period.

Though I do agree that the show is a mess and I have enough rant about the horror of their writing. However, given Sansa's marriages to Lannister and Bolton, I do think that even in the show it still makes sense somehow. If you look at the North's view, Sansa is technically still a wife of Lannister (Tyrion is not dead), and even though Ramsay is dead, if once day Tyrion appears and demands his "rights" as Sansa's rightful husband and try to take possession of the North... Of course, Tyrion is not that kind all and all, but in the North's view, it might happen as they never trust Lannister. It DOES make sense why they don't want Sansa (Sorry Lady, but what if your Lannister husband comes back?).

And Bran... well he is crippled and missing. So to keep the tradition they're going to declare Bran as their king even though they don't know where he is and how well he is, and they might have asked is Bran even alive etc... In their views, Jon is technically the only son of Ned who still can go to battle at this moment.

[Morgana Lannister]

One think that gives me more food for thought though, although this might have been covered in another thread, is:  as and when Jon finds out about his true parentage and, were he to make that public, would the northern Lords still back him as their King?

[purple-eyes]

6 minutes ago, Chib said:

This is not excuse , their only choice was Jon, period.

Though I do agree that the show is a mess and I have enough rant about the horror of their writing. However, given Sansa's marriages to Lannister and Bolton, I do think that even in the show it still makes sense somehow. If you look at the North's view, Sansa is technically still a wife of Lannister (Tyrion is not dead), and even though Ramsay is dead, if once day Tyrion appears and demands his "rights" as Sansa's rightful husband and try to take possession of the North... Of course, Tyrion is not that kind all and all, but in the North's view, it might happen as they never trust Lannister. It DOES make sense why they don't want Sansa (Sorry Lady, but what if your Lannister husband comes back?).

And Bran... well he is crippled and missing. So to keep the tradition they're going to declare Bran as their king even though they don't know where he is and how well he is, and they might have asked is Bran even alive etc... In their views, Jon is technically the only son of Ned who still can go to battle at this moment.

this is another problem with the show. In order to marry Ramsey publicly, they need to get rid of her marriage with Tyrion.

But the show just ignored that. Therefore they made Sansa a polygamist.

anyway, sansa is not wife of Tyrion, and her husband Ramsey is dead.

She had her right to become the heir of House Stark.

 

[KingInTheBay]

15 hours ago, TheLastLibrarian said:

Anyone one of you think that Jon Targaryen can usurp winterfell from the starks like that if the True King Stannis won against the Boltons?

King Stannis will behead him for that, King Stannis is just and he loves the starks and he will never let a miserable bastard rule Winterfell

 

12 hours ago, TheLastLibrarian said:

This is why always I hated him and the extreme favouritism of the story towards Jon, first they killed the True King Stannis and gave his story to Jon and now they are making Sansa looks like a traitor because she's siding LF against Jon, she didn't like get usurped by a targaryen, she's the rightful heir

 

The true king Stannis? The baby burner? You do realize Shireen would be Queen the moment Tommen dived out the window if her father hadn't cooked his heir.

[Chib]

3 minutes ago, purple-eyes said:

this is another problem with the show. In order to marry Ramsey publicly, they need to get rid of her marriage with Tyrion.

But the show just ignored that. Therefore they made Sansa a polygamist.

anyway, sansa is not wife of Tyrion, and her husband Ramsey is dead.

She had her right to become the heir of House Stark.

 

 

2

Well actually Tyrion can still come back and claim to be Sansa's husband if he wanted. The question that Lyanna Mormont asked Sansa was pretty much the confused situation of Sansa: "Are you a Lannister or Bolton?"

The North is not convinced that Sansa is totally free from her marriages.  And I think that in many parts of Westeros, they still think of Sansa as Tyrion's wife.