FittleLinger Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Thanks for the responses. Sorry Brandon Weirtree...I buried my question down in the post so it is not immediately obvious. I need to work on my post writing! I guess her "false kings" comment struck me this time around because I now see the leech burning as more of a dog and pony show. I think she saw that these kings were going to die and tried to play it that burning the leeches with the king's blood made it happen when really it would have happened regardless. I thought maybe the false king bit plays into that. It does not take much imagination to think that others will step in to fill the breech of fallen kings whether she sees it in the fires or not. I just wonder if she is riffing, saw something vague, or if she saw something concrete. Thanks again, hope this brain fart makes sense! It also doesn't take much imagination to think that in a 5 kings free-for-all war, eventually some of them will die. So she may have even not seen it in her fires. A Stannis victory ultimately involves all of those dying, so if Stannis wins / kings start dying, she can take credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.