divica

23 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I accept that Dany could potentially be anyone, same for any character really I suppose. Dany could be Viserys. When she says if I look back I'm lost, maybe she means if I look down I'm lost? Personally I think her story and character-arc work much better if she is who we are told.

Some readers think it's about surprises that we can guess at and wait until the next book comes out to find out who guessed right. That's not how good stories work though. Characters are crafted with wounds and goals and traits, they have internal conflict and an external conflict to resolve, and their arcs are created with plot-points where they make decisions that ultimately either succeed or fail to resolve those conflicts. Then there is the symbolism and foreshadowing and themes built into the arc. All of this is part of the story the author is telling us. If you take the Targaryen out of Dany, then you rip the heart out of her arc, in my opinion.

If people want to think that she is someone else, fine, I'm just saying I'm not at all convinced.

I don't quite agree. So far it is important for danny to be valyrian. Being a targ only is important when she starts focusing on the IT and westeros. At the moment nothing danny did is because she is a targ nor is she really obecessed with what is happening in westeros. And if she ends up not being a targ she is kind of free to go live her life wherever she wants instead of a place she knows nothing about and probably doesn't want her (westeros).

4 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

But this is so contradictory. You say the real Dany was used to make an alliance. An alliance with who? Just Viserys and Willem Darry? But then you say the Targaryens only value is what the plotters around them choose to give them. If that's the case then why do they need to make a secret marriage alliance using the real Dany, who they took back to Dorne in the guise of the Archon's daughter?

Then there's the point @Nevets is making. If they swap the real Dany for a fake, then in the eyes of the world it is the fake who is the real Dany. If they later reveal the real Dany the world will think she is a fake produced by Doran. So Dorne end up with the real Dany, who the world thinks is the Archon's daughter, while their fake is who the world thinks is Dany.

Even Doran's son Quentyn thinks she is the real Dany. Did Doran neglected to tell him when he sent him off to bring her back? Or did Doran just realize that his fake Dany scheme actually made no sense and the less said about it the better? Besides, he may as well get on board with the rest of the world and pretend the fake he swapped is now the real Dany, she is the one with the dragons after all, and the Archon's daughter, who was the real Dany, is just a pool lounging freeloader he really has no use for.

A much simpler question.

why would viserys live a life of misery if he had some secret aliance with dorne? At the very least he would have the funds to live in his own house...

The only way lemongate could work for me is if the real danny died and viserys went insane and decided to kidnap a valyrian girl that looked like her and pretend she is his sister.

1 hour ago, astarkchoice said:

Ilyrio could not  in a million years have predicted dany would wage a sucessful war on slavery though..we are told time and again she does things hes not expecting!

If slavery is abolished then the free city thats done without and is already a more modern  capitalistic economy(bravos)  will be best placed to take advantage thus the IB will take a hit and also a boost..if anything the dozens of smaller banks in the slavery dependant free cities (soon to have slave uprisings too) are far more likely to fold than the IB  at all.

Quote

"Not by intent, no, but Qarth is a city of merchants, and they love the clink of silver coins, the gleam of yellow gold. When you smashed the slave trade, the blow was felt from Westeros to Asshai. Qarth depends upon its slaves. So too Tolos, New Ghis, Lys, Tyrosh, Volantis … the list is long, my queen."

The problem here is that either directly or indirectly slaves are a fundamental part of essosi economy. If most people of essos have financial problems then a bank that does business with a lot of people in essos (not only bravosi) should have problems.

And even bravos certainly imports or exports products to or from people involved in the slave business. The price of everything is about to change in essos. It will be chaos!

2 minutes ago, astarkchoice said:

Hes not a rich as the other banks nor is he set up as a bank thus he cannot fill that gap as well as other banks  or the 100s of other rich traders , not that the IB will collapse anyway nor would the faceless men (whos spy network will have easily penetrated vary abd ilyrios) allow such a plot to get as far.

Erm  virtualy every free city has its own currency nor does the collapse of  the biggest bank in bravos collapse its economy to nothing !!! goods and services will still be traded and even if bravos currency was  somehow now  default due to IB collapse   theres at least a dozen other currencies  flowing around to trade in anyway  before we talk gold, silver, precious stones , rare goods or straight bartering!!!

Erm pentos IS trading in slaves, doing it openly doesnt add a giant amount more to their economy  nor can bravos giant almaot unfair  advantage at sea be nulified by anything and shit even if they went the way of valyria theres still all the other free cities!!! Volantis  giant navy and harbour would fill most of that gap not  a mid  level player  like pentos!!

Ned wasnt  political player nor did he have  a vast army of spies, ilyrio and varys came up together with varys being the spylord and ilyrio the moneyman not the otherway round!! Its also be stupid to have varys and lf expending so much energy competing if they both had the same ally

 

Huh? Why would a rich merchant want to run the economy of a the 7 kingdoms....is that a serious question!!! Theres no such laws agaisnt insider trading back then so that alone! Ilyrios chief export is described as cheesmonger so if he drops the tax on that alone and/or increases it on rivals hed be swimming in gold.

Thats one port (white harbour is the maderlys who awnser to boltons )  even then valetown isnt  fully his nor did you  that include the ports or oldtown or lannisport or the iron islands , arbour etc nor was control  any of that (bar maybe valetown) predictable from lfs standing as young man!!

Actually I remember an old topic about how essos economy might be pretty bad because of danny's actions. And even if bravos doesn't deal with slaves the IB deals with people that used to deal with slaves. And it seems will even worse in the future with the war in mereen, the red priests gaining power, volantis getting involved, cities being destroyed...

If you add all the things that are happening it makes sense for the IB to bankrupt.

15 minutes ago, sifth said:

Sorry, but the Dorne story can be cut almost entirely. Members of the family tried a coup, it failed. There I just saved you 100 pages. Euron becoming king can be summarized in an Asha flashback. There another 100 pages saved. So now we can focus on the main characters again, now that those side bars are gone. 

danny could also be easily cut. we just need to know whatever policies she has at present to deal with slavery and the dragons could start causing problems after the time jump.

4 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Other smaller banks would fill the gaps. So what? Illyrio would be the first to capitalize on that, and no one is in a better position to trade with Westeros than him. 

The IB collapse would send the Braavosi economy into the gutter. It's the only place we know of that uses a proxy currency. No economy means no army, no navy, no merchant fleet, no money to pay shipbuilders or crews or captains, no money to buy goods to sell them at higher prices elsewhere . . . It would bring complete social upheaval. All the wealth is gone in an instant.

Pentos is not doing as much trade as possible. Braavos dominates trade on the Narrow Sea. Opportunities for Pentos would open like daises on a spring day if Braavos is removed -- just like Braavos thrived after the Doom

Varys not knowing Illyrio's full scheme is perfectly in line with the political subterfuge that permeates the story. It's no more stupid than Ned not knowing what Petyr or Varys are up to or Cersei not know what Tyrion is plotting. There are players and there are pieces, and sometimes the players are pieces and don't know it.

Varys is not working for 0 gain. He wants to put Aegon on the throne. That's his gain. But that is not Illyrios true aim. That alone, in fact, would provide 0 gain for Illyrio. Master of Coin? Why on earth would a man with Illyrio's wealth and power want to count coppers for a snotty teenage? The Sealord said his cat was a rare and exotic beast.

Petyr is Lord Protector of the Vale, which has Gulltown. He is also Lord of Harrenhal and Lord Paramount of the Trident, which brings him Saltpans, Maindenpool and Fairmarket. And he has Sansa, who is the rightful Lady of Winterfell, which brings White Harbor. So that's five. The only remaining port is King's Landing, which will likely be a shell of a city once the Iron Throne is no more and the realm has devolved back into seven independent kingdoms.

So sorry, but no one has shredded anything. 

 

 

IT could be simpler. ilyrio could have a plot to use the fall of the IB to gain power in several free cities and then use his influence to make them join westeros and make a huge empire for faegon. The interesting part here is having a character planning an economic atack in order to seize power in some way. And that it would be a good story arc for LF.

41 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Eh, there's quite a bit to back it up if you look closely.

what there is to back it up is pretty forced and exposed shortly before the reveal so that the author can say there was a justification for it. The "joffrey did it" was a lame choice and has several plotholes...

17 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

See, I think how smoothly a king’s reign is has less to do with logic and more about what the author wants to happen. Littlefinger is an absurd character who should have been dead a long time ago, but the story needs him to succeed, so he does. Robb and Stannis are both competent leaders, but the story needed them to fail, so they did. I definitely think GRRM could have convincingly written the Lannisters’ fall from grace even after five years of relative peace (especially if efforts to quell the Riverlands went belly-up and Jaime had to then be dispatched as a last resort, which is logically what would need to happen with a time jump). The bigger issue would be what happens to Jaime and Cersei’s relationship. 

that is kind of a deus ex machina argument. Fuck logic, anything can happen as long as the author wants it. And there is no way to refute that...

On other news, do you really think that there could be a rebellion in the riverlands for 5 years!? what would even be the point of that rebellion? For example, there are several small clues that LSH and the brotherhood might be planning to rescue the northern hostages and restart robb's rebellion via jon snow. That would make no sense with the time jump.

honestly, the only way to the the time jump would be with  novella focused on jon and stannis. And even with how things are in the books the north is too behind what it needs to be. Hell, why didn't jon ask anyone to teach him to warg during the entire adwd?

1 hour ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Kevan was always a wingman. He would have been competent on his own, but he’s used to taking orders from someone else. I think he would have stabilized things, but not to the point where Cersei couldn’t undo it after he left.

Robert could whore and drink 24/7, have a small council where half the people were plotting against him (varys, lf) and even then had a stable realm. After some years any competent guy with the resources behind the lannisters and tyrels should have things close to what they were in robert's time. It is basically how to deal with the consequences of the war (this kevan should know how to do) and then politics to keep people happy. 

47 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I think the five-year gap could have worked with Cersei if Kevan had been Hand during that time and AFFC starts with him stepping down after finally having enough. He would have kept Cersei at bay during that time, but with him gone now she has no one to counteract her. Plus in this version, Tommen would be 12, so the story could pick up with him about to marry Margaery for real, and the Tyrell’s growing influence, along with the ticking time clock to Tommen reaching adulthood, is part of what puts Cersei over the edge.

Keep in mind that Cersei wasn’t as cartoonishly incompetent in the first three books. GRRM really put his thumb on the scale in AFFC. Realistically, it should have taken her much longer to flame out like that.

I don't know if the gap would have worked with someone like kevan as hand because he would have stabilized westeros and then cersei would have to fuck it all again.

It is better if she is queen during the gap and when the story starts she has comitted some small fuck ups but her reign is filled with hidden problems like the faith militant.

22 minutes ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

In Daenerys I, Game 3, we learn that Illyrio has been aiding the Targlings and showering them with gifts for the past six months. Illyrio, who speaks Dothraki, has brokered a betrothal between Drogo, khal of the greatest of the Dothraki khalasars, and Daenerys, that will benefit Viserys’s claim to the Iron Throne...

Notice that Viserys suggests that he does not need Drogo’s entire khalasar of one hundred thousand, including forty thousand fighters, to make good his claim; Viserys believes he only needs ten thousand. This suggests that a higher number of Drogo’s warriors were promised, or at least contemplated, but Viserys seems to want, or have been promised, only ten thousand. 

In Daenerys II, Game 11, we also learn that, through Illyrio, Khal Drogo has promised Viserys a crown. While this is a foreshadowing of the crown of molten gold Drogo actually gives Viserys, the passage clearly suggests to the reader that Drogo has bargained for his bride by promising to support materially Viserys’s claim. But we can only trust Illyrio so far. So, whether Drogo actually promised to support Viserys’s claim in exchange for his Targaryen bride, or Drogo actually promised Illyrio a number of Dothraki fighters, or Illyrio brokered the marriage to secure Drogo’s friendship in hopes of obtaining his material support, we cannot know with certainty. In any event, Illyrio tells us that Drogo will not aid Viserys until after he presents Daenerys to the dosh khaleen, and then, only “if the omens favor war," suggesting that Viserys should be prepared to wait “another few years." And notice that Jorah supports Illyrio in his counsel to Viserys. 

A bit later, we encounter the three egg MacGuffins...

We are told expressly that these three dragon’s eggs are ancient, petrified eggs from the Shadow Lands beyond Asshai, and we recall that Illyrio is a trader in dragonbone with a trading network that stretches to the fabled lands beside the Jade Sea. 

We also learn that the three dragon’s eggs are worth the fortune in horses and slaves that Illyrio collected from Drogo for brokering the marriage pact. Does this mean that Illyrio gave Daenerys to Drogo, so Drogo gave Illyrio a fortune in horses and slaves? If so, then Drogo would not “owe” Viserys a crown, would he? On the other hand, should we believe that Daenerys’s property was, in fact, the property of her husband and khal, and that by giving Daenerys such “a truly magnificent gift,” that Illyrio had upset the gift-giving balance back in his favor? 

Keep in mind this could be nothing more than a plot device. In his 1993 letter, outlining his earliest concept of A Song of Ice and Fire, we see that The George initially intended to have Daenerys stumble upon a nest of petrified dragon’s eggs on the edge of the Dothraki Sea. 

In Eddard II, Game 12, King Robert informs Lord Eddard that Lord Varys has sent word of the wedding. Very curiously, the source of the information is revealed to be Jorah, who Robert claims “is now in Pentos, anxious to earn a royal pardon that would allow him to return from exile," and that "Lord Varys makes good use of him." Now, we can connect Illyrio and Jorah to Varys. Of course, the casual first-time reader should assume here that Jorah is Varys’s agent spying on Illyrio and the Targlings for King Robert. But given what we learn later, we know that Varys is actually a double agent in league with Illyrio, and thus using information from Jorah to influence events at court.

Back in Daenerys I, Game 3, we learned that Rhaegar’s heir was murdered during the sack of King’s Landing. Here Eddard informs us “that Rhaegar's little girl had cried as they dragged her from beneath her bed to face the swords. The boy had been no more than a babe in arms, yet Lord Tywin's soldiers had torn him from his mother's breast and dashed his head against a wall.”

Despite Robert’s hatred of all Targaryens, we learn that he did not send assassins after the Targlings as Viserys suspected; but rather Jon Arryn had persuaded him not to do so. When Eddard pointed out that there was not much they could do about it anyway, Robert agreed . . .

This is very confusing: If the Dothraki hate and fear the open sea, why would Drogo agree to send tens of thousands of Dothraki fighters to help Viserys, or any other claimant, to claim the Iron Throne across the Narrow Sea?

Daenerys recalls an important scene involving Illyrio and her brother in Daenerys III, Game 23...

So, Illyrio wanted Viserys to remain in Pentos. I do not subscribe to the reverse psychology theory, which posits that Illyrio wanted Viserys to go off and die in the Dothraki Sea, so he told him to stay in Pentos. That’s cockamamie to my mind. Illyrio’s blink suggests that he was surprised by Viserys’s intention to go with Drogo. Illyrio clearly expected Viserys to remain in Pentos, where Illyrio could ply him with Lysene bed slaves and Arbor gold.

But here is an interesting question: If Viserys had remained in Pentos, would Jorah have gone with Daenerys? He swore his sword to Viserys after all. I suspect that The George did not work this out completely. We know that Daenerys is off to become the Mother of Dragons and the head of a motley host of Dothraki, unsullied, and freedmen, as well as a collection of sellswords, and possibly even Victarion’s Ironmen. And we know that the George, against Illyrio’s wishes, wanted Viserys to get his molten crown in Vaes Dothrak. And, in that way, the George would have Jorah go with Drogo, eventually siding with Daenerys, but keeping tabs on her for Illyrio until they reach Qarth. 

In Arya III, Game 32, we see Illyrio, incognito, one more time before we meet him again, much later, with Tyrion in Dance. Here we learn that Varys is in league with Illyrio.

This tells us that Varys does not want Eddard to discover the truth of the “twincest.”

Here we see that Varys believes that the fools, plural, meaning Cersei, Jaime, and Tyrion, attempted to assassinate Bran. But we learn by the “purple wedding” that it was Joffrey. In any event, we see that Varys has a great deal of respect for Eddard’s fortitude, if not for his cunning.

Notice who gives the command: Illyrio, and who follows the order: Varys. Varys is working for Illyrio, not the other way around. 

I love this exchange. When the casual, first-time reader reads this, he understands the Hand in question to be Jon Arryn, and that Varys must have caused Jon Arryn’s death, especially since we just learned that he does not want the new Hand learning about the “twincest,” and we learn as we read, that Jon was killed after learning about the “twincest.” But substitute another Jon, Jon Connington, in for Jon Arryn, and you can see what Illyrio might have been suggesting: That Varys attempt to co-opt Eddard into their ulterior plot. 

Recall, that Drogo will not aid Viserys until after he presents Daenerys to the dosh khaleen, and then, only “if the omens favor war." Perhaps, this was what the author was hinting at when he had Illyrio tell Viserys that he would have to wait. Perhaps Illyrio understood that the real gift to Drogo was not a Targaryen bride, but a dragonlord heir, the stallion who mounts the world.

Varys urges his master to hasten Drogo’s material support of their ulterior plot. 

Is Varys frustrated by Illyrio's patience? Perhaps Varys exercises initiative not intended by Illyrio...  In Eddard VIII, Game 33, we learn that Jorah has informed Varys, presumably through Illyrio, that Daenerys is pregnant. amd Varys counsels Robert to have Daenerys and her unborn heir assassinated. 

In Daenerys IV, Game 36, the Targlings enter Vaes Dothrak, and Jorah expands our understanding of Dothraki gift-giving...

This seems to reinforce the idea that Varys, and Illyrio, need to provoke Drogo into action since, even if the gift giving balance is in Illyrio’s favor, he cannot compel Drogo to act as soon as he might wish. 

When Daenerys VI Game 54 opens, Viserys has already been "crowned," but interestingly Illyrio does not yet know this. Presumably Jorah would have sent word back, but not before Varys's would-be assassin departed with the caravan out of Pentos.

Daenerys attempts to persade Drogo into winning the Iron Throne for their son, but Drogo refuses, expressing no desire to cross the Narrow Sea. We have to wonder whether Drogo is still just delaying to honor a commitment to Illyrio until the birth of his heir, or whether Drogo believes that his end of the bargain is moot now that Viserys is dead. 

In any event, Jorah is anxious to meet a newly arrived caravan from Pentos to see if Illyrio has sent any communication. He shrugs off Daenerys, though, preferring to see the caravan captain alone. 

Note  that the caravan captain was not surprised. Does this mean he was in on it? Was he a fail safe in case Jorah could not prevent the assassination? 

In the wake of the attempt, Drogo vows...

Is this what Illyrio and Varys intended? Keep in mind that when the bargain was struck, Viserys was alive. When the assassination was ordered but set up to be foiled, Viserys was alive. When Drogo vowed to conquer the Seven Kingdoms for Rhaego, Viserys was already dead. 

In any event, this foreseeable vow by Drogo gives rise to the idea that the fat man's plan was to have Drogo break the Seven Kingdoms, and then have Aegon come in and mop up the mess. 

By points.

Viserys believes he only needs 10k men because he thinks other lords will pledge themselves to him when he arrives in westeros with a decent force. There doesn't need to be more hidden reasons for his thoughts...

As can be seen in the several passages you quoted drogo clearly promised to help viserys conquer the IT. at most we don't know how much help drogo promised to give because a few thousand dothriaki could satisfy viserys and varys/ilyrio ambitions.

In regards to the eggs it is clearly a plothole. iliryo could have used them to pay for mercenaries that would suport viserys at any time he wanted. There is no need to make the complex plan of marrying danny to the dothriaki... It is simillar as to why jon got longclaw instead of darksister that was last seen near the wall... Or the justifications for joffrey trying to kill bran... I am sorry, but either because a lot of lore didn't exist at the time (darksister) or because grrm changed the story over the years there are things that now don't make sense.

Drogo agreed to suport viserys because he married danny. This is clearly stated... So despite their fear of the ocean in exchange for danny they would travel to westeros. In regards to viserys staying behind it makes complete sense. iliryo wanted to keep him safe until drogo did his savage rituals and returned with an army ready to support viserys claim. And viserys could have ordered jorah to be his representative among the dothriaki ensuring they keep their word... It realy isn't that interesting or important...

In regards to the conversation between varys and ilyrio it sounds more like a conversation between allies than between master and servant. I don't think ilyrio even gives a single order. He simply asks varys to do things or gives his opinion...

The probem with your jon con theory is that ilyrio is clearly saying for varys to kill the hand and we know jon con isn't dead. And certainly nobody expects ned to fake his death and abandon his familly and the north to follow their plan against his best friend... At most you can search if there was a hand in aerys time that died of misterious circunstances. THAT could work.

Finally, wether viserys was dead or alive was kind of irelevant. They needed the dothriaki to invade westeros. It doesn't matter if they do it because of viserys, danny, rhaego or out of revenge. 

50 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

The real plan, for Illyrio at least, is to use the turmoil in Westeros to crash the Iron Bank. This will free Pentos from Braavosi control so Illyrio can become even richer selling slaves and otherwise dominating trade on the Narrow Sea. Varys is just a patsy in this scheme, as is Aegon. Illyrio's top co-conspirator in all of this is Littlefinger, who created the debt that will help bring down the bank and is now positioning himself to gain control of all the ports on the Westerosi side of the sea.

This probably will never happen, but it would pretty cool.

It reminds me about the theories that mance rider was the one that payed the catspaw to kill bran. And then grrm crushes us with some stupid joffrey did it for reasons that barely make sense...

49 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Plainly the people in the North think very highly of the Starks - as witness the Manderlys, the Mormonts, the Mountain Clans, and Stannis' desire to associate his cause with avenging House Stark.  

Places that suffered at the hands of Northern soldiers, such as Duskendale, or the Westerlands will think poorly of them.  

Feelings are probably somewhat mixed in the Riverlands.  The Red Wedding is considered a heinous crime (as it is everywhere), but there is probably some resentment at the fact that Robb's marriage to Jeyne Westerling had such disastrous consequences. 

I think you are generalizing too much. For example, I don't know how much robb or sansa are liked in the north. One is the king that lost the north and the other is lady lannister.

14 minutes ago, SeanF said:

The Greatjon’s argument for independence is that their oaths of fealty were to the Targaryens, who are now gone.

13 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

It was also because Stannis had not actually made a claim at that point and told no one at all of his intentions so... No one knew of his intentions until months later.

Quote

Lady Mormont agreed. "Lord Stannis has the better claim."

"Renly is crowned," said Marq Piper. "Highgarden and Storm's End support his claim, and the Dornishmen will not be laggardly. If Winterfell and Riverrun add their strength to his, he will have five of the seven great houses behind him. Six, if the Arryns bestir themselves! Six against the Rock! My lords, within the year, we will have all their heads on pikes, the queen and the boy king, Lord Tywin, the Imp, the Kingslayer, Ser Kevan, all of them! That is what we shall win if we join with King Renly. What does Lord Stannis have against that, that we should cast it all aside?"

"The right," said Robb stubbornly. Catelyn thought he sounded eerily like his father as he said it.

Quote

Catelyn was thinking of her girls, wondering if she would ever see them again, when the Greatjon lurched to his feet.

"MY LORDS!" he shouted, his voice booming off the rafters. "Here is what I say to these two kings!" He spat. "Renly Baratheon is nothing to me, nor Stannis neither. Why should they rule over me and mine, from some flowery seat in Highgarden or Dorne? What do they know of the Wall or the wolfswood or the barrows of the First Men? Even their gods are wrong. The Others take the Lannisters too, I've had a bellyful of them." He reached back over his shoulder and drew his immense two-handed greatsword. "Why shouldn't we rule ourselves again? It was the dragons we married, and the dragons are all dead!" He pointed at Robb with the blade. "There sits the only king I mean to bow my knee to, m'lords," he thundered. "The King in the North!"

And he knelt, and laid his sword at her son's feet.

Robb and the northmen knew that stannis is the rightfull king if they want to pass over the lannisters. And the argument that they kneeled to the dragons and that stannis isn't a targ is at most only half the reason why they rebelled. I think nobody believes that at the time any northmen would kneel to viserys or danny after what their father and borther did...

And as I said, they don't want stannis or any of the other candidates because they aren't form the north as greatjon explain in the majority of his speech.

edt: Also the argument that they owed their fealty only to the dragons is false. The north was sworn to robert. They acepted the barateons as kings.

3 minutes ago, SeanF said:

If the books were to end with a showdown between Daenerys and the Starks, I could understand fans picking one side or the other (and if it were to end like that, I suspect that the author would wish to make both sides sympathetic).

Picking the Lannisters or Freys, or Boltons, over the Starks makes no sense at any level, since the Lannisters are Dany's enemies, and she would be disgusted by both Freys and Boltons.

I actually think the OP raised an interesting question. what do the people in the story think about the starks? because while the readers know the truth the people in westeros don't have acess to the same information as us. For example, I remember that there were all manner of rumors about how sansa escaped KL. Like she transformed into a winged wolf or something like that. If the smallfolk believe in those stories it is an interisting topic to discuss what the people in the diferent regions of westeros think of the starks...

3 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

So if Robb et al are all evil for rebelling against Joffrey, I assume @Aline de Gavrillac, @Moiraine Sedai and @H Wadsworth Longfellow that you view Joffrey as the rightful king? Because if Daenerys is the rightful Queen, then Robb did nothing wrong by rebelling against Joffrey, who was never the rightful king so it wasn't treason in the first place. Could someone please explain this apparent conflict of opinion to me?

Technically stannis is the rightfull king. Danny's familly lost the throne. She has a claim if she can conquer it, but stannis is the rightful heir to the throne. And Robb rebelled against stannis for no other reason than the northmen not wanting to be ruled by southerns.

25 minutes ago, Chad Vader said:

Searched and didn't see it anywhere. Anyways I'm half way through and it's had its moments. Some I dislike but I won't discuss them at this point.  https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HvaXYZJ69Ow&pp=ygUYNyBraW5ncyBtdXN0IGRpZSB0cmFpbGVy

the ending was the best part. The final battle lacked wow moments or even anything memorable. the rest had good and bad parts but it is yhe kind of movie that if you think about it had LOTS of things that didn t make sense

54 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

I'm not sure.  Five years time:  Stannis goes to Essos, gets money and mercenaries, comes back North, works to establish ties, keeps fighting the Others, plots about going South.  Jon is lord commander, dies, comes back, works with Stannis to protect the North.  Cersei will have been pre occupied with her own enemies.  Maybe she's engaged in some diplomacy or sent some soldiers at one time or the other.  It doesn't work as well as some of the other stories, but it has been TWENTY THREE years since Swords came out.  At the end of Dance Arya is still only 11.  Bran is 10 I think.  

**I have confidence that GRRM could have come up with something better than the above paragraph for the 5 year gap if he had put his mind to it.

 

5 minutes ago, Kyll.Ing. said:

I think the more pressing problem is that of the Others, as they have emerged as an urgent threat as early as the Great Ranging, and they are the main force driving the Wildlings south toward the Wall, practically snapping at their heels as they move. Once the Others have been set in motion with that show of force, it'd be a bit awkward for them to go back into hibernation for five years and wait for the rest of the plot to happen before they move again.

The problem is that grrm drove himself into a hole with the north. That place needs time to heal, to build defenses and weapons against the others, deal with food problems, build glass gardens, unite itself... 

If the others attack anytime soon the north will fall pretty fast. On the other hand, grrm can easily create a plot where the others need to find the horn of joramund in order to pass through the wall or something else and therefore their atack could  still be far away.

And yes, certain characters need time to train and adquire new skills. But the really big problem here is that the north is just really behind where it needs to be because there was no time jump. Even a time jump of 1 or 2 year would solve a lot of problems.

On 4/6/2023 at 3:44 PM, Cas Stark said:

I've said for years, he should have made the time jump work, even if it would have worked less well for some characters than others.  It would have been immeasurably preferable to the running in place we got in the zlast two books, that caused the author to become so caught up in the weeds that at the end of Dance he didn't progress the story up to the 5th year.  Two books and the children are still children

 

probably he should have released a novella about what happened north of the neck during the time jump and then released the book he wanted. Because the big problem here is the north and that 5 years is just too much.

46 minutes ago, Nathan Stark said:

C'mon guys. This sniping at each other is pretty counterproductive. No need to namecall or come within Godwin's Law. It's fiction. Let's enjoy the characters and discuss the proposal at issue. 

Is Dany Azor Ahai come again? I think not, because Azor Ahai was never a person that existed. Azor Ahai is a part of a monomyth, and is a similar figure to the Last Hero, another mythical figure that never existed. These figures are not here to be reborn as literal people. They are more or less archetypes. Dany might share similar traits to the mythical figure, as does Jon, but neither of them are literally Azor Ahai.

I think that in Agot grrm wanted us to think that danny was AA and in Adwd he wants us to think that after all it might be jon because he drops a lot of hints in that book.

1 minute ago, Jaenara Belarys said:

Try it. Let's see. 

Not me. I don't remember enough of her chapters in dance to open a topic about it. You do it and have fun.

Just now, Jaenara Belarys said:

Oh I see a lot of problems:

1. Why marry to solidify your rule over a city you'll be leaving eventually?

2. Blood taxes are well and good, but you need to actually crack down. 

3. I don't like the murder of children, so maybe get older hostages to use? And then actually do something? 

4. You might not have enough soldiers to take on the Yunkai'i, but you have some 13,000 Unsullied. The Unsullied are the best foot in the world and discipline is better than numbers. 

5. Reopen the pits, it's a good way of making money and it shows you respect their customs, even if you're not staying forever 

I am not talking about anyone in specific, but open a topic criticizing danny rullings in mereen and you will see what happens.

And besides what you said, you realize how insane it was to order the unsulied to take care of the sick people? She could(and may) lose her armies because some of her soldiers get sick and spread the illness. And I don't like the bias she has against slavers in the decisions she has while holding court. It feels like she wants peace but at the same time keeps punhishing the slavers for their past actions. She has to either acept that as her subjects they have equal rights to the former slaves or she has to get rid of the slavers. The mid term serves no one.

1 minute ago, Jaenara Belarys said:

It ain't much progress. 

In regards to this talk.

I find much more interesting how most people don't see anything wrong with how danny ruled mereen. I have had several discussions here over the years about that and people just never change their minds about anything. 

15 hours ago, El Guapo said:

Dany knows nothing about AA. In fact of all the contenders she is the only one who has never heard of the prophecy.

But will learn pretty fast when red priests and their followers start arriving to where she is. 

1 minute ago, LynnS said:

I think the war was fought on several fronts not just in Westeros.  We don't know when the battle for the battle for the dawn took place.  Was it before the hammer of the waters?  Were there still land bridges spanning the Narrow Sea?  It seems the First Men had their own hero who's sword did break.  That doesn't mean AA is the same hero, but someone who is a hero to the Red Lot who also fought in the battle for the dawn.  His sword most certainly didn't break and he dispatched a beast that sounds a lot like a white walker.  But he didn't end the Long Night or dispatch the ancient enemy to which Mel refers.  Perhaps this is why she tells Jon that the Wall is her place as much as it is Jons. 

The part about several fronts I totally agree and that AA might only be the one that defeated the others in an area where people believed in r'hllor.

But think on this. Why would a red priest need a sword that emanates heat? And if the WW can be killed by steel (dragonsteel) why would anyone want to incorporate fire into a sword? And keep in mind that a fire sword would be of very limited use to couter the cold genereted by the others.

To me it only makes sense to put fire into a sword if AA is looking to create a weapon that can resist the cold from the WW weapons because all his weapons shatter when they touch.

3 minutes ago, Springwatch said:

To me, melting sounds a bit odd - I'd have expected eyes to sizzle and steam, maybe - I assume the oddness is to highlight the link. Works for me anyway.

But the eyes aren't 100% water so they couldn't just steam. There would always be a melting effect present. And at least to me melting eyes make more sense than steaming eyes. Anyway, the language makes sense to me. Maybe I am weird.

6 minutes ago, Springwatch said:

It's an assumption worth considering, because experts in both traditions think Dany is their hero.

I'm not really seeing the problem with the dragons. It's just another way of saying a team isn't it?

I have some doubts about what moqorro thinks, but we have had several examples of characters being completly wrong. Or changing their mind afterwards.

And I meant that maybe there will appear more dragons. That the dragon must have 3 heads may not mean much.

12 minutes ago, Springwatch said:

But here's the thing. Dany is a long way down her path - the bleeding star, the dragons from stone. Prophets swarm round her like bees at a honeypot. If Rhaego is a red herring, Dany would be a red whale, and there's no graceful way to dispose of a dead red whale.

Of course there is. In asoiaf you just have to send letters anouncing you have free food.

And danny thinking she is AA and then finding out she isn t would be completly in tone with her arc. Don't forget she thinks she is the last targ but everyone knows that isn't true. She probably isn't even the heir to the IT and when she gets to westeros the people will already be suporting a diferent targ (faegon).