Meera of Tarth

"Not-so-main" characters appreciation thread -Season 7 [Book Spoilers]

66 posts in this topic

Davos is one of the few characters on the show I am still invested in and would be pissed if something happens to him (i.e. get's killed or turned comicly evil/stupid). Really hope his strange actions in S6 were just a badly planned/written transition into Jons plotline and that he becomes a more consistent character again in the future.

Lady Mormont is adorable and a comic relief that works very well for me (contrary to most of the others, like Bronn oder Pod), but I hope she get's a little more personality if her role continues. So far, she is pretty much just a "sassy little girl" meme. I also want Jon to offer give Longclaw back to her. After all, she was his most fervent supporter.

Don't really care much for any of the others tbh. Meera a little bit, but sadly she has too little of a role in the show to really get invested and accoring to the spoilers that won't change.

Alfie Allen occasionally manages to make Theon intriguing to me but the current Ironborn plotline is just a drag and it doesn't feel like he belongs there. He really should have stayed with Sansa and somehow contributed to or at least witnessed Ramsays downfall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rhollo said:

Davos is one of the few characters on the show I am still invested in and would be pissed if something happens to him (i.e. get's killed or turned comicly evil/stupid). Really hope his strange actions in S6 were just a badly planned/written transition into Jons plotline and that he becomes a more consistent character again in the future.

Yes, Davos is one of my favourite secondary Characters. I didn't like how they managed the Shireen incident(just talking a little bit about that in the first episodes and then nothing until the finale ones) though; but at the end of the season he showed great determination and I loved his reaction towards Melisandre.

I'm invested in him as well and I'm looking forwards his actions in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Yes, Davos is one of my favourite secondary Characters. I didn't like how they managed the Shireen incident(just talking a little bit about that in the first episodes and then nothing until the finale ones) though; but at the end of the season he showed great determination and I loved his reaction towards Melisandre.

I'm invested in him as well and I'm looking forwards his actions in the future.

In my opinion, quite possibly the single best scene in ALL of GOT is when Davos confronts Melisandre about the death of Shireen with Jon Snow present.

Just tremendous.  So powerful, it makes my eyes water just to think about it.

I hope before the series is done, Davos will cross Melisandre off, and I'm predicting that WILL happen.

Whether Melisandre realized it or not, the burning of Shireen was pure evil, and the scales must be balanced.

Stannis deserved to die for it, and I'm glad it led to his death. (Selyse realized that too, and at least had the decency to cross herself off)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

35 minutes ago, Cron said:

In my opinion, quite possibly the single best scene in ALL of GOT is when Davos confronts Melisandre about the death of Shireen with Jon Snow present.

Just tremendous.  So powerful, it makes my eyes water just to think about it.

I hope before the series is done, Davos will cross Melisandre off, and I'm predicting that WILL happen.

Whether Melisandre realized it or not, the burning of Shireen was pure evil, and the scales must be balanced.

Stannis deserved to die for it, and I'm glad it led to his death. (Selyse realized that too, and at least had the decency to cross herself off)

I'm not so sure if Ser Davos will kill Melisandre. I think that Melisandre has a role to play in the endgame (and that's why they made her leave WF...but she is still there somewhere), and I am also of the opinion that she will meet Arya, as it was foreshadowed in Season 3.

According to the "leaks"

Spoiler

minor spoiler

Spoiler

the leaks don't say that Mel meets Arya so maybe they meet in S8.

 

I completely agree with the Davos-Mel-Jon scene. It was so powerful and it was one of the moments that I enjoyed from the finale.

Edited by Meera of Tarth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Cron said:

In my opinion, quite possibly the single best scene in ALL of GOT is when Davos confronts Melisandre about the death of Shireen with Jon Snow present.

Just tremendous.  So powerful, it makes my eyes water just to think about it.

I hope before the series is done, Davos will cross Melisandre off, and I'm predicting that WILL happen.

Whether Melisandre realized it or not, the burning of Shireen was pure evil, and the scales must be balanced.

Stannis deserved to die for it, and I'm glad it led to his death. (Selyse realized that too, and at least had the decency to cross herself off)

That was IMO one of the better scenes from last season, one where Davos made a very good point.

I was averse not to that scene itself but to the actual burning of Shireen. Stannis has stated at the start of the season that he'd do anything for Shireen, saving her from greyscale when everyone else had given up on her. When Mel suggested burning Shireen, Stannis rejected it out of hand. Yet next time we see Stannis, he's done a total 180 apparently because of a bit of snow and the situation doesn't come across as dire/desperate. Suddenly he's decided to randomly burn his heir and the daughter he cares for more about than anything else?? Like so much from the last two seasons, I found this impossibly inconsistent and out of character, and included by the writers simply for shock value.

Yes I'm aware that apparently Mel burns Shireen in the books, but it sounds like a vastly different context; either (A) the situation is extremely desperate, or, more likely (B), Stannis isn't involved in this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

I'm not so sure if Ser Davos will kill Melisandre. I think that Melisandre has a role to play in the endgame (and that's why they made her leave WF...but she is still there somewhere), and I am also of the opinion that she will meet Arya, as it was foreshadowed in Season 3.

According to the "leaks"

  Reveal hidden contents

minor spoiler

  Reveal hidden contents

the leaks don't say that Mel meets Arya so maybe they meet in S8.

 

I completely agree with the Davos-Mel-Jon scene. It was so powerful and it was one of the moments that I enjoyed from the finale.

Well, I think you're surely right about everything you said.

Perhaps Davos will cross her off at the end of Season 8, though.  But hey, maybe I'm wrong.  Certainly we've learned that in Game of Thrones, some good people die young, and some bad people get away with being bad, and I don't think it will all wrap up so neatly that "justice is served" in each and every instance.

(Indeed, I've believed for a long time that in the end, many sub-plots will be left totally unresolved, especially in the books, which have FAR more sub-plots than the show.  We could probably list many, many examples.  Is the Sailor's Wife really Tysha? We may never know.  Did Jaime meet the real Jeyne Westerling, and is she really pregnant with Robb's child?  We may never know.  The books are so huge in scope and so packed with details, characters, secondary characters, and tertiary characters that I don't see how GRRM can possibly resolve it all AND wrap up all the main stuff in just 2 books.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CaptainTheo said:

That was IMO one of the better scenes from last season, one where Davos made a very good point.

I was averse not to that scene itself but to the actual burning of Shireen. Stannis has stated at the start of the season that he'd do anything for Shireen, saving her from greyscale when everyone else had given up on her. When Mel suggested burning Shireen, Stannis rejected it out of hand. Yet next time we see Stannis, he's done a total 180 apparently because of a bit of snow and the situation doesn't come across as dire/desperate. Suddenly he's decided to randomly burn his heir and the daughter he cares for more about than anything else?? Like so much from the last two seasons, I found this impossibly inconsistent and out of character, and included by the writers simply for shock value.

Yes I'm aware that apparently Mel burns Shireen in the books, but it sounds like a vastly different context; either (A) the situation is extremely desperate, or, more likely (B), Stannis isn't involved in this.

I agree enthusiastically with your comments about how it happened as being an outrageously abrupt and highly implausible 180 degree turn in Stannis.

Indeed, as I strongly recall, quite a bit of time in Season 5 is devoted to the relationship between Stannis and Shireen, including but not limited to, the scene where he talks to her about how he risked the life of EVERY person at Dragonstone (including his own) and refused to send her away when she first got greyscale.  Note also that when Mel first proposes the burning to Stannis, Stannis is APPALLED, and reacts as such, saying something like "Are you mad??" and telling her to get out of the room (or something like that).

Then, BAM, next thing we know...Stannis is on board with it, and just standing there impassively while Shireen is burned alive. (In fact, I believe these two scenes, where Stannis asks Mel if she's mad, or whatever, then Shireen is burned, occur quite closely together, maybe in the same episode, but surely no more than a scene or two apart in Stannis' storyline, with nothing in between that even begins to explain such a radical reversal in his position.)

As I've mentioned elsewhere, the burning of Shireen is the thing I dislike most about the entire show (No. 2 on that list was the shoehorning of Sansa into Jeyne Poole's storyline, with both occurring in Season 5).  Perhaps Stannis may not be involved in the burning in the books, a possibility you suggest, but I'm sure I'll still hate the scene in the book.  Still, though, I suppose even this says something about the show and the books, that we care so much about characters, and that is one measure of effective storytelling)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Rhollo said:

Davos is one of the few characters on the show I am still invested in and would be pissed if something happens to him (i.e. get's killed or turned comicly evil/stupid). Really hope his strange actions in S6 were just a badly planned/written transition into Jons plotline and that he becomes a more consistent character again in the future.

Lady Mormont is adorable and a comic relief that works very well for me (contrary to most of the others, like Bronn oder Pod), but I hope she get's a little more personality if her role continues. So far, she is pretty much just a "sassy little girl" meme. I also want Jon to offer give Longclaw back to her. After all, she was his most fervent supporter.

Don't really care much for any of the others tbh. Meera a little bit, but sadly she has too little of a role in the show to really get invested and accoring to the spoilers that won't change.

Alfie Allen occasionally manages to make Theon intriguing to me but the current Ironborn plotline is just a drag and it doesn't feel like he belongs there. He really should have stayed with Sansa and somehow contributed to or at least witnessed Ramsays downfall.

Davos was fine because he had to go on. As far as we know he doesn't have anymore kids unlike in the books, so he had find someone worthy of following but asking Mel to perform magic on Jon was a bit odd. He's the personthat hates it.

Lady Lyanna Mormont is many thing but not a comic relief. Why would Jon give them back Longclaw? He kinda needs it for the fight against the White Walkers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2017 at 8:34 PM, Meera of Tarth said:
  Reveal hidden contents

Yes, I really want them to talk about Arya.

 

Great stuff, that would be a fascinating conversation!!

I'd love to talk about it more, but maybe not here, since you hid it, and this is s your thread, so you make the rules, My Lady.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

40 minutes ago, Cron said:

Great stuff, that would be a fascinating conversation!!

I'd love to talk about it more, but maybe not here, since you hid it, and this is s your thread, so you make the rules, My Lady.

I think I hid it because it was in response to a spoiler. but as I said, if there is a "spoiler" that is covered from promotional pics or pics in general from a reliable source, (and not the content related to the pics from possible spoilers of reddit) it can be discussed without hidding it.

Like, if we know there is a pic from filmings with certain characters from a reliable source like WatchersonTheWall, it can be a "spoiler"  but it's a minor one and these are permitted in this thread as stated in the OP, what I meant is that we can talk/speculate about what they could be talking about when they meet, and not say "this leaker said A and B would talk about C while doing D", because this could be a huge spoiler (although not from a reliable source, so it could be false).

So specualting about people is talking is permitted as long as it doesn't reveal the plot that is almost confirmed it will happen. In that case, use a hidden box and we can also talk about it.

Edited by Meera of Tarth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

I think I hid it because it was in response to a spoiler. but as I said, if there is a "spoiler" that is covered from promotional pics or pics in general from a reliable source, (and not the content related to the pics from possible spoilers of reddit) it can be discussed without hidding it.

Like, if we know there is a pic from filmings with certain characters from a reliable source like WatchersonTheWall, it can be a "spoiler"  but it's a minor one and these are permitted in this thread as stated in the OP, what I meant is that we can talk/speculate about what they could be talking about when they meet, and not "this leaker said A and B would talk about C while doing D", because this could be a huge spoiler (although not from a reliable source, so it could be false).

So specualting about people is talking is permitted as long as it doesn't reveal the plot that is almost confirmed it will happen. In that case, use of hidden box and we can also talk about it.

Nice!

I'll do my best to comply.

Personally, I prefer to let it all hang out, spoilers don't bother me at all, and certainly speculation about future events does not bother me in the least, but I understand not everyone is like that, so I try to be accommodating, and respectful of others' preferences.

in one of my threads, though, as far as I'm concerned, it's "anything goes."  

Full throttle, no brakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15.6.2017 at 5:49 AM, Lord Friendzone said:

Davos was fine because he had to go on. As far as we know he doesn't have anymore kids unlike in the books, so he had find someone worthy of following but asking Mel to perform magic on Jon was a bit odd. He's the personthat hates it.

Davos' wife should still be alive, returning to her, after he lost everyone else he cared for, would have made the most sense. But I understand that they didn't just want to write a character out of the series that way. Putting him on team Jon was the logical choice, but still, it felt forced in many places. Also, he didn't really contribute anything that another character couldn't have done, and more organically even, I would argue.

On 15.6.2017 at 5:49 AM, Lord Friendzone said:

Lady Lyanna Mormont is many thing but not a comic relief. Why would Jon give them back Longclaw? He kinda needs it for the fight against the White Walkers.

D&D themselves said that in the ItE the Jon's pleading with her was "inherently fun to watch" and her "talking smack". So yes, she was deliberately written to be comic relief.

And why would Jon give back Longclaw to the Mormonts? Well, as a token of gratitude to what turned out to be his most loyal vassal? And maybe because, after quitting the NW, he feels he doesn't deserve it anymore?

Yes, he needs it for the fight against the WW, but most likely the Mormonts will also be involved in the fight, and therefore could make good use of it.

But I admit, that's a very, very in-universe perspective, for the viewers, of course the hero of the story needs to keep the magic sword.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rhollo said:

Davos' wife should still be alive, returning to her, after he lost everyone else he cared for, would have made the most sense. But I understand that they didn't just want to write a character out of the series that way. Putting him on team Jon was the logical choice, but still, it felt forced in many places. Also, he didn't really contribute anything that another character couldn't have done, and more organically even, I would argue.

Like who? Nobody else could do what Davos is doing, by being Jon's unofficial or official Hand of the King. Sansa, Tormund, Mel? Who else would be doing. Davos knows the danger of the White Walkers, was Hand to Stannis, been to battles, has charisma to convince others and knows people.

Quote

D&D themselves said that in the ItE the Jon's pleading with her was "inherently fun to watch" and her "talking smack". So yes, she was deliberately written to be comic relief.

Partially written that way but also with her no nonsense attitude later on talking sense into other Lords.

Quote

And why would Jon give back Longclaw to the Mormonts? Well, as a token of gratitude to what turned out to be his most loyal vassal? And maybe because, after quitting the NW, he feels he doesn't deserve it anymore?

Yes, he needs it for the fight against the WW, but most likely the Mormonts will also be involved in the fight, and therefore could make good use of it.

But I admit, that's a very, very in-universe perspective, for the viewers, of course the hero of the story needs to keep the magic sword.

Jorah is not worth it even if Jon might offer him that, Jeor gave it to Jon, Lyanna is no warrior yet and the Mormonts have no other character that could or should wield it more than Jon. Besides the fact that he needs this sword as you've mentioned it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Lord Friendzone said:

Like who? Nobody else could do what Davos is doing, by being Jon's unofficial or official Hand of the King. Sansa, Tormund, Mel? Who else would be doing. Davos knows the danger of the White Walkers, was Hand to Stannis, been to battles, has charisma to convince others and knows people.

Why did Jon he need anything like a HotK last season ? He never seemed to aspire to be a king, not even seemed to want being a leader really. He was on a personal quest to get rid of the Boltons, until he got declared king pretty much out of nowhere.

 

And what did Davos effectively do ?

He pressured Mel to resurrect Jon, which was, as you agreed, not in character. Mel could've decided herself to do this, since her interest in Jon was established in past seasons.

Davos had 2 or 3 lines in convincing Lyanna to join them. Something that could've (and should've, given Lyannas otherwise fierce loyalty to the Starks) very well been accomplished by Jon and Sansa themselves and the fact that Rickon (who should be the current KitN to her) was Ramsays prisoner. And even if the wanted the WW threat to be the point to convince her, Jon or even Tormund would have made more sense to bring it up, since they actually were at Hardhome. Davos really has no particular knowledge about them.

Otherwise, he once advises two Stark-children about houses in the north (really no need for that, that was just exposition for the audience) and talked to Tormund about shitting.

And his experience in battles didn't come into play either, since they just charge into the Boltons and abandon all tactics they laid out beforehand (use trenches to NOT get overrun by the cavalry) right away.

So yes, I think his actions could have very well been given to Mel, Tormund or Sansa, even making more sense in many cases.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Rhollo said:

Why did Jon he need anything like a HotK last season ? He never seemed to aspire to be a king, not even seemed to want being a leader really. He was on a personal quest to get rid of the Boltons, until he got declared king pretty much out of nowhere.

 

And what did Davos effectively do ?

He pressured Mel to resurrect Jon, which was, as you agreed, not in character. Mel could've decided herself to do this, since her interest in Jon was established in past seasons.

Jon never aspired to be King but he wanted attention of Northern lords towards the White Walkers.

Mel lost her confidence and he had to push her to do something. Not in his character but he did it. It essentially brought back Jon.

Quote

Davos had 2 or 3 lines in convincing Lyanna to join them. Something that could've (and should've, given Lyannas otherwise fierce loyalty to the Starks) very well been accomplished by Jon and Sansa themselves and the fact that Rickon (who should be the current KitN to her) was Ramsays prisoner. And even if the wanted the WW threat to be the point to convince her, Jon or even Tormund would have made more sense to bring it up, since they actually were at Hardhome. Davos really has no particular knowledge about them.

He had 2 or 3 lines and did more than Jon or Sansa during that meeting. The guy from Gin Alley convinced Lyanna Mormont. Sansa had no idea how to talk to Northern lords - as described by Lord Glover, same with Jon. Did you see how he schooled them? Who would believe wildlings in the North or even let them be live? Lord Glover would kill them on the spot, same as the Mormonts.

Quote

Otherwise, he once advises two Stark-children about houses in the north (really no need for that, that was just exposition for the audience) and talked to Tormund about shitting.

What about when he and Stannis saved Jon from wildlings or when he lead attack on Blackwater Bay. He has far more experience than Tormund in this or Sansa.

Quote

And his experience in battles didn't come into play either, since they just charge into the Boltons and abandon all tactics they laid out beforehand (use trenches to NOT get overrun by the cavalry) right away.

So yes, I think his actions could have very well been given to Mel, Tormund or Sansa, even making more sense in many cases.

He had to because Jon fucked up their plan. It's not in his character to just shoot his own men. Tormund had no idea about tactics or hw to fight like any army or even Sansa. Let's be real about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lord Friendzone said:

He had 2 or 3 lines and did more than Jon or Sansa during that meeting. The guy from Gin Alley convinced Lyanna Mormont. Sansa had no idea how to talk to Northern lords - as described by Lord Glover, same with Jon. Did you see how he schooled them?

Yes, I saw that scene, and the fact that Jon and especially Sansa didn't know how to talk to northern lords while some guy from Gin Alley could is just the kind of contrivance simply for the sake of giving Davos something to do that I am critizising. Dumbing down characters to make others look competent.

1 hour ago, Lord Friendzone said:

What about when he and Stannis saved Jon from wildlings or when he lead attack on Blackwater Bay. He has far more experience than Tormund in this or Sansa.

He had to because Jon fucked up their plan. It's not in his character to just shoot his own men. Tormund had no idea about tactics or hw to fight like any army or even Sansa. Let's be real about it.

I agree, but that doesn't change anything, Davos' (possible) role as a military commander didn't matter. Also, he is an admiral (whose fleet Jon somehow seems to have lost on his way back from Hardhome btw.), and therefore naval warfare would be his expertise.

 

Again, I like the character of Davos and I think he could have fittet very well in Jons plotline. But he just seemed thrown in there with little effort to make him fit. And I hope, this changes next season. At least we finally had the long overdue confronted Mel about Shireen, so that doesn't awkwardly linger over him anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rhollo said:

Yes, I saw that scene, and the fact that Jon and especially Sansa didn't know how to talk to northern lords while some guy from Gin Alley could is just the kind of contrivance simply for the sake of giving Davos something to do that I am critizising. Dumbing down characters to make others look competent.

I agree, but that doesn't change anything, Davos' (possible) role as a military commander didn't matter. Also, he is an admiral (whose fleet Jon somehow seems to have lost on his way back from Hardhome btw.), and therefore naval warfare would be his expertise.

It shows Sansa has much to learn and reconnect to the North. Jon is not exactly the best at giving speeches or convincing people this way. He leads by the example on the battlefield.

Jon has this fleet most likely. We just haven't seen it.

Quote

Again, I like the character of Davos and I think he could have fittet very well in Jons plotline. But he just seemed thrown in there with little effort to make him fit. And I hope, this changes next season. At least we finally had the long overdue confronted Mel about Shireen, so that doesn't awkwardly linger over him anymore.

They put him there because Jon needs him, same way Dany Tyrion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Lord Friendzone said:

It shows Sansa has much to learn and reconnect to the North.

And how exactly is Davos more "connected" to the north ?

13 hours ago, Lord Friendzone said:

Jon is not exactly the best at giving speeches or convincing people this way. He leads by the example on the battlefield.

Jon isn't exactly the best at leading on the battlefield either, since he apparently forgets all pre-prepared battle plans immediately.

13 hours ago, Lord Friendzone said:

Jon has this fleet most likely. We just haven't seen it.

Then why did return from Hardhome NORTH of the Wall instead of landing with the fleet south of it (or at Eastwatch)? Either he lost the fleet somewhere on the way to or back from Hardhome or he is incredibly stupid, by landing somewhere north and then leading the refugees through at least 150 miles of Walker and Wight-infested wilderness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rhollo said:

And how exactly is Davos more "connected" to the north ?

Sansa showed how little she knows about northerners and has to reconnect. The point of next season family vs power/southern style LF. I never said Davos is more connected but from a basic principle, he knows people better. North, Westerlands, Reach, Essoe, or Summer Isles. Nobody wants to die for the lost cause and people while from various places are pretty much same in nature.

Quote

Jon isn't exactly the best at leading on the battlefield either, since he apparently forgets all pre-prepared battle plans immediately.

Watchers on the Wall, Hardhome? He was influenced by Rickon and trying to save him, Starks have quick temper and slow minds as Baelish would say. So yes, for the most part Jon is leading peope on the battlefield by an example.

Quote

Then why did return from Hardhome NORTH of the Wall instead of landing with the fleet south of it (or at Eastwatch)? Either he lost the fleet somewhere on the way to or back from Hardhome or he is incredibly stupid, by landing somewhere north and then leading the refugees through at least 150 miles of Walker and Wight-infested wilderness.

One of the things many people do not understand but he has his fleet. Magically it will appear when they'll gonna need it. They wanted to have staredown between Jon and Thorne leading up to For The Watch moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lord Friendzone said:

Sansa showed how little she knows about northerners and has to reconnect. The point of next season family vs power/southern style LF. I never said Davos is more connected but from a basic principle, he knows people better. North, Westerlands, Reach, Essoe, or Summer Isles. Nobody wants to die for the lost cause and people while from various places are pretty much same in nature.

So Sansa can't convince the northerners because she knowns too little about them and has to reconnect (an argument I don't really buy btw. she still lived in the north for the biggest part of her life), but Davos can, because people from various places are pretty much the same in nature, anyway.

That sounds contradictory.

2 hours ago, Lord Friendzone said:

Watchers on the Wall, Hardhome? He was influenced by Rickon and trying to save him, Starks have quick temper and slow minds as Baelish would say. So yes, for the most part Jon is leading peope on the battlefield by an example.

I don't deny that Jon is leading on the battlefield, I think he is doing a very bad job at it. Quick temper, slow mind, indeed. He acted pretty stupid in Hardhome, too. As Karsi rightfully pointed out, he should have fled first and stayed out of the fight , because if he dies, they are all doomed.

In WotW, he did fine, but Thorne was the guy in charge there.

2 hours ago, Lord Friendzone said:

One of the things many people do not understand but he has his fleet. Magically it will appear when they'll gonna need it. They wanted to have staredown between Jon and Thorne leading up to For The Watch moment.

So either a gaping plothole or an incredibly stupid character, just to have a few seconds of drama.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now