Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
balerionsteel.

3Eyed Raven already told how the Night King must be defeated

20 posts in this topic

3 seasons and 2 actors ago, The 3 Eyed Raven told Bran that HE will face the Night King. And that when he comes for him, Bran must be ready by then to face him. How will Bran face the Night King? What will he need to be ready for this? He doesn't tell him that he must be ready to give enough information for Jon or allies to stop him. he doesn't tell Bran that he must figure out something from the past to pass along. He tells him that the Night King will come to face him, and when he does, BRAN must be ready to face him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're going to have an epic chess match. 

... or Bran will have to perfect his warging abilities

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The writers have blatantly been setting the NK up as a boss fight for Jon since Hardhome, so I can't see anyone else being the one to defeat him.

If Bran does face him first, either through warging abilities or through time travel, it will almost certainly result in Bran's death. Though perhaps it may weaken the NK in some way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am wondering if its something along the lines of a 2 tiered approach. 

Some have theorized that the Night King knew Jon Dany would bring her dragons to bring the wall down, this would make him a greenseer, perhaps he is like an evil Bran, able to go back in time to amend, not necessarily change the past to give a desired outcome in the present.

I think the battle Bran must win is through time, both are working through time making small amendments to give them the upper hand in the present final battle, Bran has to win this battle for the good heroes in the present to be victorious.

If Bran wins this battle of time, the night king becomes vulnerable and Jon is able to defeat him in physical battle. 

Share this post


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

3 seasons and 2 actors ago, The 3 Eyed Raven told Bran that HE will face the Night King. And that when he comes for him, Bran must be ready by then to face him. How will Bran face the Night King? What will he need to be ready for this? He doesn't tell him that he must be ready to give enough information for Jon or allies to stop him. he doesn't tell Bran that he must figure out something from the past to pass along. He tells him that the Night King will come to face him, and when he does, BRAN must be ready to face him.

That's because he has to figure out, because he is as MAIN player as other more stereotyped characters from the show. He will play a key role with his powers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/5/2017 at 3:20 PM, summitxho said:

I am wondering if its something along the lines of a 2 tiered approach. 

Some have theorized that the Night King knew Jon Dany would bring her dragons to bring the wall down, this would make him a greenseer, perhaps he is like an evil Bran, able to go back in time to amend, not necessarily change the past to give a desired outcome in the present.

I think the battle Bran must win is through time, both are working through time making small amendments to give them the upper hand in the present final battle, Bran has to win this battle for the good heroes in the present to be victorious.

If Bran wins this battle of time, the night king becomes vulnerable and Jon is able to defeat him in physical battle. 

I like the 2 tiered approach. You have to remember that he was taught "we can learn from the past, but we cannot change it." Meaning that whatever bran learns in the past and or interevenes with, it has already happened. I Can see it being a 2 tiered Scene like that of The "Hold the Door". Bran finds something in the night kings past....while warging some kind of fight with jon ensues as something goes wrong in the past at the same time as ____ Kills the night king. Its either what makes the children create the night king in the first place, Or Jon says something to the nigth king knowing Bran is warging the past like "My brother has already killed you, you just dont know it yet" which motivates the Night King to Kill Bran. It has to be some type of bitter sweet scenario that ends up being the cause of something that has already happened, because "We Cannot change the past"

Share this post


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

You have to remember that he was taught "we can learn from the past, but we cannot change it."

That doesn't necessarily mean what it sounds like.

It could be that Bran is already predestined to have changed things in the past, so it's not really a change. Hodor was already broken when Bran met him, even though Bran turned out to be the cause of it later, and in the same way, the Night King may already have a weakness that Jon (or whoever) can exploit that goes back 8000 years, even though Bran turned out to be the cause of it later.

Or it could just be "can't" in the sense of "mustn't": it's not impossible, but the consequences are terrible. (Like destroying the very fabric of spacetime, which, as environmentalists, the Children are opposed to.)

Or it could be either sense, but the reason they can't/mustn't change the past is that they don't have the knowledge and experience to do so, and Bran either acquires that knowledge, or has to do it anyway in desperation. (Much like Doctor Who, where one of the most famous lines is "You can't rewrite history, Barbara, not one line!", and yet over the next 50-odd years we repeatedly learn that it's actually a lot more complicated than that, and knowing when you can and can't, and should and shouldn't, change time is something even a time lord has trouble with.)

But it could well mean that Bran really can't change the past, and you're right, it's about Bran learning something from the past that Bran can use in a mental duel to distract the NK, or that Jon can use against him, or whatever.

1 hour ago, balerionsteel. said:

Its either what makes the children create the night king in the first place

I think that one's pretty obvious. The First Men broke the pact with the Children and restarted the war, and the Children were losing, so they became desperate.

Sure, it could be something more complicated, but I doubt it will be (at least on the show—the books could be much more nuanced, or even go in a totally different direction).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, falcotron said:

That doesn't necessarily mean what it sounds like.

It could be that Bran is already predestined to have changed things in the past, so it's not really a change. Hodor was already broken when Bran met him, even though Bran turned out to be the cause of it later, and in the same way, the Night King may already have a weakness that Jon (or whoever) can exploit that goes back 8000 years, even though Bran turned out to be the cause of it later.

Or it could just be "can't" in the sense of "mustn't": it's not impossible, but the consequences are terrible. (Like destroying the very fabric of spacetime, which, as environmentalists, the Children are opposed to.)

Or it could be either sense, but the reason they can't/mustn't change the past is that they don't have the knowledge and experience to do so, and Bran either acquires that knowledge, or has to do it anyway in desperation. (Much like Doctor Who, where one of the most famous lines is "You can't rewrite history, Barbara, not one line!", and yet over the next 50-odd years we repeatedly learn that it's actually a lot more complicated than that, and knowing when you can and can't, and should and shouldn't, change time is something even a time lord has trouble with.)

But it could well mean that Bran really can't change the past, and you're right, it's about Bran learning something from the past that Bran can use in a mental duel to distract the NK, or that Jon can use against him, or whatever.

I think that one's pretty obvious. The First Men broke the pact with the Children and restarted the war, and the Children were losing, so they became desperate.

Sure, it could be something more complicated, but I doubt it will be (at least on the show—the books could be much more nuanced, or even go in a totally different direction).

It Means exactly what it sounds. And If you read everything I wrote you will realize that you just restated what i then what on to say lol....Hodor was already broken, Meaning that Bran going back and messing with him already happened. It was destiny, it could not be altered in any way. Thats why (again if you read what i said), I then went on to say any change that bran makes in the past to defeat the night king would cause something that has already happened, just like the Hodor scene.

I don't think its obvious that it is Bran that causes the children of the forest to make the night king?? there have definitely been theories of this but its far from obvious based on what we know. (maybe this another case of misreading when you said that)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, balerionsteel. said:

And If you read everything I wrote you will realize that you just restated what i then what on to say

No. You stated that there is only one possible meaning, and I showed that there are at least four different ways to interpret it that fit with the show so far. The fact that one of those four is the same as yours does not mean I'm saying the same thing as you.

45 minutes ago, balerionsteel. said:

I don't think its obvious that it is Bran that causes the children of the forest to make the night king??

Where did you even get that from? Here's what I said: "The First Men broke the pact with the Children and restarted the war, and the Children were losing, so they became desperate." Where do you see anything about Bran there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, falcotron said:

No. You stated that there is only one possible meaning, and I showed that there are at least four different ways to interpret it that fit with the show so far. The fact that one of those four is the same as yours does not mean I'm saying the same thing as you.

Where did you even get that from? Here's what I said: "The First Men broke the pact with the Children and restarted the war, and the Children were losing, so they became desperate." Where do you see anything about Bran there?

Thank you for clarifying that it was just that you didn't read anything that i wrote and decided to respond to selected quotes for some reason lmao.
YOU didnt say anything about bran. But the original quote which you took a  few words from was my sentence about Bran. I said: Bran in the past would do something that will become the cause of something that has already happened. I said Either what Bran does will Make the children create the night king in the first place, or....and offered another example. You then quoted the second half of my sentence only and made it seem like i was only alledging that the children created the night king...which we already know happened because they literally told us that already. So the only way you reading what i wrote made sense was that you felt it was obvious bran caused it. but now we know that its that you didnt read what i wrote.

3 hours ago, balerionsteel. said:

Its either what makes the children create the night king in the first place

You :"I think that one's pretty obvious. The First Men broke the pact with the Children and restarted the war, and the Children were losing, so they became desperate."


And you didnt offer any examples. Again this is a breakdown in reading comprehension which really doesnt matter. Bran Cannot Change the past. IT means what it says. Everything that he changes has already happened. I dont know how to make this more clear for you lol. All the "changes" he makes are already made, and so they are fate. There was no way for him not to make Hodor, Hodor. Just like whatever changes he makes going forward will have already been pre-destined by something that has already happened. Eg: if he goes back and makes you misquote me, you already actually misquoted me so now we know what caused it.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, balerionsteel. said:

Thank you for clarifying that it was just that you didn't read anything that i wrote and decided to respond to selected quotes for some reason lmao.

I'm sorry, there's no point in talking to you, because you're clearly just looking for an argument. You win, good job, now let's move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question... I dont recall any night King in the book. Perhaps I'm wrong. If so someone correct me please. 

 

The reason I mention this is because his origin matters. Meaning, if D&D made him up, then that's kind of a big deal. If so, he may not be in the book and that may mean the book ending is different by a large margin. Also, (and my point) you have to now think like D&D. 

 

From what I see, it's straight forward.  Bran will have some sorta psychic showdown while Jon-gon finishes him off. Simple, predictable and straight up D&D's alley. 

Edited by MrJay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MrJay said:

Question... I dont recall any night King in the book. Perhaps I'm wrong. If so someone correct me please. 

 

The reason I mention this is because his origin matters. Meaning, if D&D made him up, then that's kind of a big deal. If so, he may not be in the book and that may mean the book ending is different by a large margin. Also, (and my point) you have to now think like D&D. 

 

From what I see, it's straight forward.  Bran will have some sorta psychic showdown while Jon-gon finishes him off. Simple, predictable and straight up D&D's alley. 

In the books, there's the 13th Commander of the Night Watch who fell in love with a woman from beyond the wall with pale skin and blue eyes. He pursues her, sleeps with her, loses his soul and then takes her back to the Nightfort. He subsequently crowns her Night Queen and himself Night King.

The story is related by Nan to Bran in one of the Bran chapters in GOT.

And yes, I agree with you completely, the whole NK thing in the show is probably going to very different from the books.

Thinking like D&D is going to be... challenging I think!

Edited by Pearly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, MrJay said:

Question... I dont recall any night King in the book. Perhaps I'm wrong. If so someone correct me please. 

There is no Night King in the books. In fact, there's no indication that the Others have any kind of hierarchy at all.

21 minutes ago, Pearly said:

In the books, there's the 13th Commander of the Night Watch who fell in love with a woman from beyond the wall with pale skin and blue eyes. He pursues her, sleeps with her, loses his soul and then takes her back to the Nightfort. He subsequently crowns her Night Queen and himself Night King.

Actually, he exists in the show too, or at least on the S2 DVD extras, where Ygitte tells a story nearly identical to Nan's. GRRM is quick to remind people that this legendary character is called Night's King (on the DVD extras as well as in the novels), not The Night King, and he thinks Night's King sounds a lot cooler. And he's clearly a completely different person from the Night King—not the first White Walker, etc. And GRRM has said that he definitely won't be showing up in the present day, at least in the novels.

But you can see why a lot of people get confused. Which is probably why the show hasn't mentioned Night's King in the main episodes, or at all since S2. If they can't handle Asha and Osha, they certainly can't handle Night's King and the Night King.

21 minutes ago, MrJay said:

The reason I mention this is because his origin matters. Meaning, if D&D made him up, then that's kind of a big deal. If so, he may not be in the book and that may mean the book ending is different by a large margin. Also, (and my point) you have to now think like D&D. 

I'd be willing to bet there's nothing like the Night King in the book, but that doesn't necessarily mean the book ending is radically different. Some of D&D's changes are pure invention, but most of them are simplification or streamlining, and that could be what's happening here.

If the Others collectively have something they want, or a plan to accomplish, or whatever, or if there's a way to negotiate with to defeat them collectively, that could be difficult to get across visually. Even more so if GRRM plans to reveal it in a subtle way rather than a pull-back-the-curtain reveal. Dumping it all on a single identifiable leader could make it a lot easier to adapt, without really changing the ending.

Of course the result probably won't be as cool, but pretty cool to tens of millions is better than very cool to tens of thousands and confusing and pointless to everyone else, and D&D understand that (and arguably are even sometimes overzealous in applying it). And they've only committed to the same ending and to hitting the same major plot beats for the main characters, not to having the same philosophical and thematic points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, balerionsteel. said:

I like the 2 tiered approach. You have to remember that he was taught "we can learn from the past, but we cannot change it." Meaning that whatever bran learns in the past and or interevenes with, it has already happened. I Can see it being a 2 tiered Scene like that of The "Hold the Door". Bran finds something in the night kings past....while warging some kind of fight with jon ensues as something goes wrong in the past at the same time as ____ Kills the night king. Its either what makes the children create the night king in the first place, Or Jon says something to the nigth king knowing Bran is warging the past like "My brother has already killed you, you just dont know it yet" which motivates the Night King to Kill Bran. It has to be some type of bitter sweet scenario that ends up being the cause of something that has already happened, because "We Cannot change the past"

The past cannot be changed, but I wonder if it can be edited, so that the past is not being changed itself, but the past is edited to reflect change the present/future where those rules do not apply. I think of it like a book, a book is printed and cannot be changed, but you can add in words between pages to alter the story so you have a different ending, you are not changing the words that are written, just adding to it. I hope that comes out right, this whole time travel stuff is giving me headaches!

Edited by summitxho

Share this post


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

The past cannot be changed, but I wonder if it can be edited, so that the past is not being changed itself, but the past is edited to reflect change the present/future where those rules do not apply. I think of it like a book, a book is printed and cannot be changed, but you can add in words between pages to alter the story so you have a different ending, you are not changing the words that are written, just adding to it. I hope that comes out right, this whole time travel stuff is giving me headaches!

I think I see what you mean. Like how Bran yelled and YNed stopped for a second to look. Nothing changed, but Bran added something.

 

IMO, The time travel stuff should be left out of the story. It always feels so cheap and rarely adds anything good to the story with a great risk of ruining it. It's like GRRM's magic. This is his sword with no hilt, Time Travel. It would be so much more satisfying if the 3ER was just a powerful warg who could see through trees, and someone else might have witnessed the wedding/consummation. Hell, just get my man Howland Reed back into the story. He could say that Jon is half Targ and we could leave the question who is the heir to be handled as the plot moves on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think death can be defeated.  The grim reaper will take what's his, and leave them alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Hoo said:

I don't think death can be defeated.  The grim reaper will take what's his, and leave them alone.

Bill and Ted defeated death at a mean game of twister!. Now I feel old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, summitxho said:

Bill and Ted defeated death at a mean game of twister!. Now I feel old.

haha.  Maybe Tyrion can do his truth or dare schtick and get him waasted.

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0