Free Northman Reborn

The greenseers weren’t confined to trees from a young age. The Children’s greenseers gathered in places, moved around and generally interacted with the population. They were noted as having different coloured eyes and having shorter lives, not as being physically tied to a tree from a young age. That is simply not how it worked. Bran will merge permanently with a tree yes, but only when he is old. For now, he is just undergoing his training. And will leave the cave once done.

Again. Martin may have told them Bran will be king, but it seems there will be two kingdoms at the end of the series. Might be George meant Bran would be King in the North. Which makes FAR more sense, given that he is Ned’s oldest surviving son.

Were D&D smart enough to grasp WHICH king Bran was going to be? King in the North - sure. King in the South - makes no sense.

Arya’s arc is to almost lose and then find her Stark identity again. The burying of Needle rather than destroying it. The future reunion with Nymeria. She will go from No one to Arya Stark again. And in that rediscovery of her identity the climax of her arc will be initiated - whatever that may be. Something to do with the Pack being a better option than the Lone Wolf.

I think it will be Jon. For a limited amount of time (maybe measured in years) until he voluntarily takes the Black. After that, the Throne is disbanded, which is effectively what the Show has done in a way, making it some kind of weird elected position which may end after Bran dies in any case.

Aegon will be in Cersei’s role - meaning in possession of King’s Landing with the Golden Company, but dragonless. The Dragonhorn plotline will be rather pointless if Euron does not get a dragon as a result of it, so I expect he will get one.

As seminal as the previous Long Night and Aegon’s Conquest. In fact, I would argue this moment in history combines and resolves both those initiating events, and will effectively end the legacy of both - ending the Others and Aegon’s dynasty.

I disagree that Westeros is heading for a “better” or “improved” social state. This is not a story of an upward trajectory for society. It is just a snapshot of a particular moment in the looong history of Westeros. Interesting events will happen, and the old political games, conflicts and wars will continue as before. The smallfolk aren’t being emancipated. Democracy Lite isn’t taking root. And an age of rule by omniscient greenseer plugged into Mother Earth isn’t about to Dawn.

I don’t believe this story is culminating in a theocracy of the Old Gods ruling the Seven Kingdoms. That is simply too big a leap from everything that went before. Bran ruling the North, with the North experiencing a revival of Old Gods worship - sure. The Old Gods replacing the Seven in the South - no chance.

Last Hero, master of magic, High priest of the Old Gods, immortal greenseer, sure. Agree with all of that. King of the Seven Kingdoms, nope.

Robin will be completely in Sansa’s pocket.

Just running through scenarios. Given Martin’s love for the character of Tyrion I could imagine such an outcome, but I could as easily see her married to Robert Arryn or even to no one. Edit Isn’t a kind of union between Lancaster and York kind of how the Hundred Years War ultimately ends? I’m not that close to it, however, so could be wrong.

If there is no line of inheritance at play, then Sansa married to Tyrion Lannister becomes the power couple of Westeros. She is sister to the King in the North and likely Lord of Riverun as well, cousin to the Lord of the Vale and cousin to Jon Targaryen last trueborn Targaryen. Her son by Tyrion would be connected to 4 of the great Houses. So if it comes down to pure politics the son of Tyrion and Sansa could end up King many years from now.

Your logic is flawed. I have stated why.

The difference is that an independent North is clearly and consistently set up in the books, whereas Bran as King has no logical basis in George’s work.

I disagree that the Unsullied or anyone else will have the power to exile Jon to the Wall for killing Dany. I think Jon automatically becomes King after killing Dany. I think after some time, Jon then abdicates as King and takes the Black of his own accord. And at that point the Throne either ceases to exist or it passes to Jon’s heir, either by blood or appointed by some Council. The Show just skipped this part, to reach the same ultimat end point for Jon. I also think the North’s independence is real, something hinted at throughout the books, and clung to even now by Northern loyalists. It is so out of place in the Show ending that it has to come from George. But I think it is Bran who is King in the North, with Sansa being a powerful southron political player, as sister to the King in the North - maybe even Lady of Riverrun if Edmure’s line dies out, and perhaps married to Robert Arryn or Willas Tyrell.

As someone pointed out above, it makes no sense for Sansa to be Queen in the North if Bran still lives and is King in the South. He is the Lord of Winterfell. Sansa can at best be his heir or Hand or some such arrangement. I suspect Bran becomes King in the North. You cannot just discount the religious aspect here. He is not of the Faith. He is a greenseer of the Old Gods. (Now, I wonder if an alternative is him ending on the Isle of Faces. But that’s a long shot.) Another obvious logical flaw is: imagine you have medieval Europe coming together and wanting to pick a King to rule them all. Then Russia says no they don’t want to be part of this deal, they want to rule themselves. It is nonsensical for the remaining kingdoms to then say OK, you go, but let’s pick your Tsar to be our King, despite Russia not being party to the whole deal. That’s just stupid.

Sansa will rebuild Winterfell. That is clear from the Snowcastle scene in the Vale. But in what capacity? Regent to Rickon? Hand to Bran the King in the North? Power player in southron politics who orchestrates beneficial outcomes for the North? We don’t know.

Ah so similar to how Cersei just blew ip her rivals and took the Throne despite having zero claim to it. On a serious note, though, I think the idea of a Great Council selecting a King has been carefully set up by George and will take place. However, I can so no realistic way in which Bran emerges as the Council’s choice of King.

Someone please outline a proposed path for Bran to take the Throne that would make logical sense in the books.

There is simply no logical path for Bran to the Throne. His place is among the weirwoods, among the Old Gods, not ruling the Andals and the followers of the Faith of the Seven. He is called the Prince of Winterfell by George multiple times. The lords of the South have no reason to pick him as King. He can’t have children. He is a boy in the books, way too young to be a King. There is simply no way this is happening. He will be King in the North, with Rickon as his heir. Even the Show’s outcome is not really a King. It is a kind of chancellor, elected each time the previous one dies. In other words, some kind of Ruling Council with an elected leader. When the Iron Throne gets melted, it really means it is gone. And I can really see Sansa thriving as King Bran of Winterfell’s ambassador on this council. And even as its elected head at some point. After all, that’s what her training arc prepared her for.

I think Sansa has a bigger chance of ending on the new throne of the South than Bran does. I get a sense they might not have liked the visual of Sansa taking the Throne after Dany’s death so they switched her and Bran’s fates around to make the blow less painful to Dany fans. Now an emotionless robot has taken Dany’s place, rather than a rival female taking it from her. Especially if Sansa marries shrewdly, I can see her as a powerful figure in southron politics. That’s if there is a Throne in the South, which is by no means guaranteed. In fact, if the Iron Throne is melted I don’t quite understand why that is not a hint of the Throne being disbanded in its entirety. Why should only the North get independence. I think what happens is Jon gets the Throne and he disbands it and heads off to the Wall to become the 1000th Lord Commander. So there is no King. Just a council of the Great Powers to govern relations between them.

The Show diverted Sansa North in place of Jeyne Pool. That set up an arc for her which left no room for Bran and Rickon in the Northern plot. In the books I think Bran becomes Prince of Winterfell with Rickon his heir. By pushing Sansa into that space the Show diverted Bran to the Iron Throne when there is no reason whatsoever that the other Great Lords would pick a Stark as King over them all. So Bran does become King. But King in the North, not King of Westeros. Why would the Faith pick the high priest of the Old Gods as King of the Seven Kingdoms in any case? It makes no sense.

Can we have a definitive thread to discuss the implications of the Show for the future book plot. Which parts are true and which are nonsense? I have my thoughts. Let's discuss. So let's start with the Iron Throne. I don't think Bran becomes King. I cannot see any path to him being elected King by the other Great Lords. There will be a Great Council, but like always politics will win the day, and the faction with the most support will choose the King. Just like Jon's election as Lord Commander back in Book 3.

Yep. Drogon got upgraded to breathing photon torpedoes in episode 5.