Julia H.

4) Special obsidian feline treasure.

1) 1 2) 8 3) 6

My thought exactly!

A Dame of Thrones (Or the life of Margaery Tyrell.)

Paws (The story of what happened on the shore.)

I hope everyone is well - speedy recovery to all who need it! My vote: 1. 6) Hark: Limited, original manuscript! Elegant! Handwritten! 2. 4) Highly limited offering! Maester’s extraordinary hagiography! 3. 1) Details of Valyrian Dudes.

Thanks for the invitation! I'm here.

What's the likelihood that there was only one child in whole families that Aerys killed off? He may not have specifically targeted children when he ordered the execution of complete houses, distant relations including, but nothing indicates that he spared children of his own accord either. Then we have what Ned said about Aerys, and it is anything but vague. The evidence in the books is clear and convincing.

I disagree. We know of a single child (out of two extended families wiped out) who escaped the king's revenge due to the special request of someone Aerys could not refuse - and this child was an orphan relation of a subordinate family, not a direct descendant or close kin of the lord of Duskendale. Aerys killed a lot of people, ordered complete families to be extinguished out of revenge, yet, not a word anywhere that he took care to spare the children whenever he could. On the contrary, we know he had no qualms about killing children. In-world, Ned somehow associates him with the killing of children. The author has made it perfectly clear that Aerys did kill - among others - children.

With a contest of bards: Happy New Year!

So two houses were extinguished (distant kinsmen included), and a single orphan child, whose father had been dead before the defiance, survived only because the hero of the day, who had risked his life to single-handedly rescue the king, asked this as a boon and the king couldn't refuse him. Totally not willing to kill children. Happy new year, everyone!

I agree that there is no hatred - I said so myself. Why exactly Ned associates Aerys with killing children is something he knows best. We may not know all the horrible deeds that Aerys was responsible for, but Ned does not usually say totally baseless things. We do know at least that young Dontos survived the Defiance of Duskendale only because of Barristan while whole families were killed then. Aerys killing children is not a far-fetched idea. In any case, that is how Ned speaks of Aerys, that's a fact. Not active hatred but a pretty harsh opinion nevertheless. You can call him a liar, but he does not tell similar lies about Rhaegar. Lol, no. There is nothing that even resembles happiness in that scene. I'm pretty sure it is not the same feeling. Yet, his grief about Lyanna is still rather intense (compared to the time that has elapsed) and it is remarkable that he never has half a thought blaming Rhaegar. It wouldn't need to be a thought full of hatred, just bitterness, a thought about the prince's deceptive or violent nature. Subtle hints can be important. I see no particular plot reason to put this thought about Rhaegar not frequenting brothels into the novel - so the reason could only be to say something about Rhaegar as a character (in comparison with Robert, who is all about frequenting brothels).

Ned has probably let go off any hatred he may have felt since his enemy is long defeated and long dead now, but his opinion about Aerys is still clear: Ned associates Aerys with killing children, and that's as bad as it gets in his book. He reminds Robert of Aerys when he wants to convince Robert that what he is suggesting is evil. He never expresses any similarly bad opinion of Rhaegar, not even when he recalls his sister's death, where he could realistically feel at least some bitterness about him. I find it remarkable. Also, that the one instance where he somewhat compares Robert and Rhaegar (about frequenting brothels) is to Rhaegar's advantage. It almost suggests that Ned may have, eventually, understood his sister's choice between the two men.

I would like it if Roslin, Edmure and their child (children) could eventually live a normal family life, which would somehow prove that this marriage into their overlord's house (a great favour for House Frey in normal circumstances) is what saves at least the Frey bloodline in the Riverlands.

The above should be - in some symbolic way - the fate of old Walder and his offspring. But I do not wish for the extinction of the whole family, since, obviously, not all of them were involved in the horrible crime of breaking guest right. I suppose they will lose their castle though, and the surviving Freys will be scattered in the realm.