Why Targaryens have actual dragon blood.

[Gar Weg Wun Sygerrik]

What? My post already pointed out ideas that are now proven wrong. He has a whole post about How the Targ dragon stables were not under guard and other people could have tried to ride if they wanted. I agree.

The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, as they say.

The Targaryen hatcheries would of course be generally watched and guarded, I suppose. Not much you can do when a hungry cannibal dragon drops down to gorge, but I imagine anyone who dared risk the wrath of god-like Targaryens was probably going to face severe difficulties. And then what does he get for his troubles? He maybe steals away an egg, that may or may not hatch, that may or not lead to a hatchling that will bond with them, which then has to be fed in secret out of fear of what the Targaryens will do when they find out you stole an egg...

Nah, anyone foolish enough, it's no surprise we never hear of them, they'd have been killed off pretty quick.

So then, again, you're xpecting the Targaryens to just allow any old noble to come along and claim an egg... why?

So no, I expect outside of exceptionally rare circumstances, no one but Targaryens and half-Targaryen types got chances at dragons; and those rare exceptions otherwise were probably people who failed or did not long survive their effrontery.

I don't see how you could take that as gospel that Non-targaryens got lots of chances to ride dragons and failed because they don't have magic dragon riding blood. Keep inb mind that all the history we're reading about is from Maesters. So if someone were in the extremely rare case able to run off with a dragon egg, they would never ever tell anyone about it(risking death?), and the maesters would never know, and we would never read about it unless they were successful. Sounds like they were not.

[Mrs_Darcy]

Well I think that certain families have magic from the beginning. For instance, Valyria was a continent with Dragons, yet there are only 40 dragonlord families, why is that? why didnt every Valyrian family have it's own dragon? IMO only those 40 families had 'the right stuff' required to preform that initial ritual bond out of all of Valyria. Which is also why Dany was able to recreate it, she had the right family genes and 'that extra something special' to do it.

The way these "dragonlord families" were founded could be quite profane actually:

The ancestors of those 40 families could be the ones, who initially found the dragons, trained them and rode them. I do not know, how many dragons were at first living in these volcanic fires, but if a bunch of families managed to train all accessible dragons and kept the eggs and hatchligs locked up, then they could have actually prevented anyone else from obtaining dragons.

This might actually be the reason the Targaryens wed brother to sister: they did not have to pay a dowry in dragon eggs/hatchlings, which could later be used against them.

In history, I learned that the first nobles were descendants of warriors, who had done outstanding feats and that these descendants gradually manged to have certain privileges due to their ancestors (and later legitimized these privileges by claiming their status was according to the will of God, which in this case could very well be similar to Targaryens claiming that only them can ride dragons)

[Mrs_Darcy]

I don't see how you could take that as gospel that Non-targaryens got lots of chances to ride dragons and failed because they don't have magic dragon riding blood. Keep inb mind that all the history we're reading about is from Maesters. So if someone were in the extremely rare case able to run off with a dragon egg, they would never ever tell anyone about it(risking death?), and the maesters would never know, and we would never read about it unless they were successful. Sounds like they were not.

The only instance we know, where non Targaryens allowed about just anyone a try was the Dance with Dragons and in this instance some people with a very dubious Targaryen lineage (Nettles, Ulf the White) managed to claim dragons.

Apple Martini started a topic dealing with the very dubious Targaryen heritage of Ulf the White and some of the other "seeds".

[The Sleeper]

The warging- dragon riding comparison doesn't work. The Stark kids share sensations with their wolves on a much more intensely and frequently than Dany ever does with Drogon and are constantly aware of them. When Jon and Ghost found themselves on opposite sides of the Wall, Jon felt the absence of the bond. When they sleep, they actually share consciousness. They literally become their wolves. While they may have not have full control over them, they are definitely in sync and influence their behavior by planting thoughts in their heads. This has all the signs of progressing to conscious control with Bran being ahead of the rest. Varamyr seemed to be able to control his animals by thought alone.

The other major difference is that the warging bond is the result of an ability the skinchanger has. It is not confined to a specific animal. Bran besides Summer has warged into a raven and Hodor and Arya has expanded into cats. Whatever bond Dany shares with her dragons might be related distantly but it is not remotely the same thing.

Just so that we don't get into the bloodlines. It can't be the blood of the First Men. Everybody in Westeros is of mixed heritage. The gift however is exclusively found in Old Gods worshipers. And the old gods are not abstract concepts, but actual living entities which have some degree of awareness and may have some sort of conscience. These entities are the weirwoods which have been very heavily associated with bloodmagic along with some very definite hints of necromancy. Now the heart tree of Winterfell has been growing on dead Starks for eight millennia and used to be watered with blood. I don't think it would be a stretch to consider it a part of the family.

I don't dispute that Dany has a bond with her dragons, but it does not seem enough to control them. And it looks to me like it could come down to the individual dragon. For Viserion it looks like Targ blood might not be necessary. For Rhagal it looks like it would not be enough. And this bond seems to induce a certain degree of familiarity and tolerance on behalf of the dragons. I don't see however that it is the only way.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

I probably shouldn't use the word "formula" because that's too specific for what Martin's going for.

This is the heart of what really concerns me about the inherent magic debate: On the more clearly human side of the story-- the game of thrones-- we're being sent a message that there's an interplay of blood and the person that makes the man. Blood isn't deterministic.

It seems odd to me, then, and more than a little problematic, if certain groups of people truly were given special blood by the gods. I don't mean the way it was Dany who hatched the eggs or the Starks who can warg, but in terms of there being "chosen" lines from the dawn of men who are inherently superior to the rest. This idea seems in contradiction to the rest of what Martin's stating in terms of power residing in men's beliefs and so forth.

It seems much more thematically aligned if all human control of magic stems with something designed by man, rather than some sort of divine blessing.

Valyrians used to be a people similar to the Lhazarene, overlorded by the Old Ghiscari, if history can be believed. Then, one day, they turned and conquered the Ghiscari; dragons were cited as the tools used for this purpose. Something happened between Valyrians being backwoods animal herders and overthrowing Ghiscari with dragons. One might argue logically that it was specifically the ability for humans to figure out how to harness dragons that made this difference. The question is whether all of a sudden, god gave those people the dragons by giving them special blood or if they did something that then enabled them to hatch or control dragons.

Yeah I see what you mean, and that is a very ancient secret, possibly one we will never fully know the answer to. I only can say that, while maybe certain families or whatever were 'chosen' to be special, it doesnt come without consequences. If the dragonlord families wanted to keep the blood pure to keep the dragons only interested in their family, then they were forced to start inbreeding to keep their dragons, which is a sacrifice. Plus look how hard Dany's life has been from the moment she was born, and none of it was her fault, it was her family history that put her where she is, same thing with Viserys, sure maybe they have 'chosen' blood, but fat lot of good it did him. If anything, being a Targ was the bane of his existence.

Heavy is the head that wears the crown.

[Jaehaerys Targaryen]

If Nettles is an exception, then "Targs can ride dragons and others cannot" is not true. You can't say, "This is true, except for this." If Nettles is not a Targ, and Nettles can ride a dragon, then saying "others cannot" is not true.

And it's also an assumption that Nettles is the only non-Targ among the successful seeds. The World book seems to suggest that Addam and Alyn really are Velaryon bastards, sure, but why do you take it as a given that Hugh and Ulf had Targaryen blood? Ulf, for example, is described as a man-at-arms, a group that is explicitly said to be from the non-seed pool of contenders.

What an odd thing to say, considering that the dragons are thousands of miles away from the vast majority of the major characters at this point.

"But now voices on the black council were raised to question Ser Addam’s loyalty. The dragonseeds Ulf White and Hugh Hammer had gone over to the enemy … but were they the only traitors in their midst? What of Addam of Hull and the girl Nettles? They had been born of bastard stock as well." Could they be trusted? The Princess and The Queen, Kindle Edition.

So we now know that Nettles is also a dragonseed of Dragonstone and has also the Blood of the Dragon. I've searched about this many times but now i reread the book and found this point of the book. Everyone who disagrees with that is not my problem.

The genes can change through the generations and we also have seen other dark haired-skinned Targaryens.

[MoIaF]

The warging- dragon riding comparison doesn't work. The Stark kids share sensations with their wolves on a much more intensely and frequently than Dany ever does with Drogon and are constantly aware of them. When Jon and Ghost found themselves on opposite sides of the Wall, Jon felt the absence of the bond. When they sleep, they actually share consciousness. They literally become their wolves. While they may have not have full control over them, they are definitely in sync and influence their behavior by planting thoughts in their heads. This has all the signs of progressing to conscious control with Bran being ahead of the rest. Varamyr seemed to be able to control his animals by thought alone.

The other major difference is that the warging bond is the result of an ability the skinchanger has. It is not confined to a specific animal. Bran besides Summer has warged into a raven and Hodor and Arya has expanded into cats. Whatever bond Dany shares with her dragons might be related distantly but it is not remotely the same thing.

Just so that we don't get into the bloodlines. It can't be the blood of the First Men. Everybody in Westeros is of mixed heritage. The gift however is exclusively found in Old Gods worshipers. And the old gods are not abstract concepts, but actual living entities which have some degree of awareness and may have some sort of conscience. These entities are the weirwoods which have been very heavily associated with bloodmagic along with some very definite hints of necromancy. Now the heart tree of Winterfell has been growing on dead Starks for eight millennia and used to be watered with blood. I don't think it would be a stretch to consider it a part of the family.

I don't dispute that Dany has a bond with her dragons, but it does not seem enough to control them. And it looks to me like it could come down to the individual dragon. For Viserion it looks like Targ blood might not be necessary. For Rhagal it looks like it would not be enough. And this bond seems to induce a certain degree of familiarity and tolerance on behalf of the dragons. I don't see however that it is the only way.

Did all the Stark kids worship the Old Gods? I though they worshiped both (except for Jon).

Also, although the bonds between dragons and direwolves and their masters are different. I don't believe they are any less strong as per GRRM's quote.

[The Sleeper]

I don't get it. The Valyrians pulling off building a major empire starting with sheep makes them look way cooler than being the chosen ones or something. Well, at least the original ones.

[Jaehaerys Targaryen]

I don't get it. The Valyrians pulling off building a major empire starting with sheep makes them look way cooler than being the chosen ones or something. Well, at least the original ones.

Valyria was NO empire. In the books is mentioned that Valyria was an Empire, but the "Old Valyria" was a Freehold. There wasn't any emperor or a king to presume that she was an empire or kingdom. The Government of the Old Valyrian Freehold was some kind of suzerainty, oligarchy and aristocracy. Forty noble Houses with great wealth, tremendous sorcerus abilities and hordes of Dragons ruled the old Valyrian Freehold and all Essos. Each Dragonlord of the Valyrian Freehold was a Lord Freeholder and ruled a part of the vast land the Freehold has in possession.

Governance of the Valyrian Freehold and the Lords Freeholder

The 'Freehold of Valyria' at the zenith of its power was neither a kingdom nor an empire... or at least it had neither a king nor an emperor. Instead, all free holders, or freeborn landowners, had a say in its governance.

In practice, however, the Freehold was ruled by the Lords Freeholder, powerful noble families. They were forty families of great wealth, high birth, and strong sorcerous ability, those families which controlled and rode dragons in battle, who came to dominate, were known as dragonlords. The Targaryens were dragonlords, but far from the most powerful.

_{Information: Wiki}

[The Sleeper]

Did all the Stark kids worship the Old Gods? I though they worshiped both (except for Jon).

Also, although the bonds between dragons and direwolves and their masters are different. I don't believe they are any less strong as per GRRM's quote.

You are missing the point. They grew up around an ancient weirwood that probably has the personalities and the blood of their ancestors uploaded in it (and those of the original CotF that raised it, which is where I think the gift comes from).

And you are still comparing a bond with an ability. What skinchangers can do with their ability is way broader and in the end much handier. They might be equally hard to break. Or not. But the bonds that skinchangers can create are much more versatile and from what we have seen so far much more profound. Dany has never seen through Drogon's eyes. If she does, I might be willing to reconsider.

[butterbumps!]

Yeah I see what you mean, and that is a very ancient secret, possibly one we will never fully know the answer to. I only can say that, while maybe certain families or whatever were 'chosen' to be special, it doesnt come without consequences. If the dragonlord families wanted to keep the blood pure to keep the dragons only interested in their family, then they were forced to start inbreeding to keep their dragons, which is a sacrifice. Plus look how hard Dany's life has been from the moment she was born, and none of it was her fault, it was her family history that put her where she is, same thing with Viserys, sure maybe they have 'chosen' blood, but fat lot of good it did him. If anything, being a Targ was the bane of his existence.

Heavy is the head that wears the crown.

I'm talking about a very different sort of sacrifice. As in, what Bran witnesses that crone doing with a bronze sickle in the godswood that seems to "turn on" the tree. Like Azor Ahai and Nissa. Like Craster and his sons. Dany and Rhaego. Even more "mundanely," the way Maggy draws blood and gives prophesy.

I'm essentially saying the following:

I think magic is a form of energy present in the ASOIAF universe. Like electricity is to ours, perhaps.

In order for humans to tap into this power, it seems a human performs some sort of blood sacrifice. So I lean toward the idea that no human was originally born with magical ability, but took it for themselves through spilled blood. This magic manifests in different elements despite all of it stemming from the same type of initial cause: blood sacrifice. (side note: bronze seems to be the material used in many of the magic "initiation" rituals; it's suggested that iron might have the opposite effect of shutting it off, given the info about how Others hate iron and the iron placed on the Stark tombs to keep the dead from rising).

From there-- the first practitioners of bloodmagic-- I'm suggesting that they found themselves changing somewhat through continued magical use/ exposure. And that over generations of this, that's how certain traits became inherited.

So I'm trying to say 2 things: that there are inherited magical traits due to certain people's use of magic over time, but also that I suspect anyone willing to pay the price could similarly tap into the flow.

I don't get it. The Valyrians pulling off building a major empire starting with sheep makes them look way cooler than being the chosen ones or something. Well, at least the original ones.

I agree that the idea of human origin in everything is more compelling.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

I'm talking about a very different sort of sacrifice. As in, what Bran witnesses that crone doing with a bronze sickle in the godswood that seems to "turn on" the tree. Like Azor Ahai and Nissa. Like Craster and his sons. Dany and Rhaego. Even more "mundanely," the way Maggy draws blood and gives prophesy.

I'm essentially saying the following:

I think magic is a form of energy present in the ASOIAF universe. Like electricity is to ours, perhaps.

In order for humans to tap into this power, it seems a human performs some sort of blood sacrifice. So I lean toward the idea that no human was originally born with magical ability, but took it for themselves through spilled blood. This magic manifests in different elements despite all of it stemming from the same type of initial cause: blood sacrifice. (side note: bronze seems to be the material used in many of the magic "initiation" rituals; it's suggested that iron might have the opposite effect of shutting it off, given the info about how Others hate iron and the iron placed on the Stark tombs to keep the dead from rising).

From there-- the first practitioners of bloodmagic-- I'm suggesting that they found themselves changing somewhat through continued magical use/ exposure. And that over generations of this, that's how certain traits became inherited.

So I'm trying to say 2 things: that there are inherited magical traits due to certain people's use of magic over time, but also that I suspect anyone willing to pay the price could similarly tap into the flow.

I agree that the idea of human origin in everything is more compelling.

Do you think that the original 'blood magic' passes down to your children?

LIke do you think that Dany already had the 'magic' in her since her ancestors were the dragonlords and had previously preformed the blood magic rituals (or whatever they did)?

[butterbumps!]

Do you think that the original 'blood magic' passes down to your children?

LIke do you think that Dany already had the 'magic' in her since her ancestors were the dragonlords and had previously preformed the blood magic rituals (or whatever they did)?

So, take a look at those we see perform/ engage with magic on page. Look at the Undying, Bloodraven, the warning about spending too much time in an animal's skin, the way the Red priests seem to not quite be fully human anymore, the way Stannis was egregiously drained, and so forth. I think it's clear that magic does something to your humanity. Ran said "magical radiation" earlier. I'm suggesting something similar-- that exposure to magic changes you.

In the most basic, abstract terms, what I'm suggesting is that once upon a time, an ordinary human decided to make a blood sacrifice. This split blood tapped into the stream of magic, and this human got himself power. Continued use of magic changed him over time. And his progeny took up magic and that changed them over time. And so on, developing a "magic gene mutation" for lack of a better term. (I know this looks ridiculous, but it kind of makes sense, thematically as well).

So, yes, given that Dany had dragon dreams, we know she had a trait of sorts. And it seems like the Starks do as well (and Varamyr, Borroq, etc).

But, importantly, I'm also saying that I suspect that not having a conditioned "magic gene" might not preclude you from performing magic.

[MoIaF]

You are missing the point. They grew up around an ancient weirwood that probably has the personalities and the blood of their ancestors uploaded in it (and those of the original CotF that raised it, which is where I think the gift comes from).

And you are still comparing a bond with an ability. What skinchangers can do with their ability is way broader and in the end much handier. They might be equally hard to break. Or not. But the bonds that skinchangers can create are much more versatile and from what we have seen so far much more profound. Dany has never seen through Drogon's eyes. If she does, I might be willing to reconsider.

No I'm not missing the point, I just don't agree with yours.

That the weirwood was around them doesn't mean that they would automatically be wargs. At least in Sansa's case she worshipped the Seven until she left Winterfell. A much better explanation would be that there is indeed something in her blood and that of her siblings that allows them to become wargs. Just like not all people of Valyrian heritage could ride dragons, not all people of First Men heritage can warg.

As for the bond/ability skinchanger/wargs have with their animals and the bond dragons have with their riders is a matter of opinion. That the bond/ability are not identical doesn't change the fact they exist and are quite strong. Drogon has come to Dany in dream on several occasion (teaching her how to hatch the dragons), wargs don't seem to dream in that way, they can see through their animals eyes but they don't dream of them (with prophetic implications). Let's quote the author of the books again:

A: There is no history/precedent for someone warging a dragon. There is a rich history of the mythical bond between dragon and rider. There have been instances of dragons responding to their riders even from very far away (hmm) which shows it is a true and very strong bond. We will learn more about this. Keep reading (we hear keep writing from the back of the room).

[Suzanna Stormborn]

No I'm not missing the point, I just don't agree with yours.

That the weirwood was around them doesn't mean that they would automatically be wargs. At least in Sansa's case she worshipped the Seven until she left Winterfell. A much better explanation would be that there is indeed something in her blood and that of her siblings that allows them to become wargs. Just like not all people of Valyrian heritage could ride dragons, not all people of First Men heritage can warg.

As for the bond/ability skinchanger/wargs have with their animals and the bond dragons have with their riders is a matter of opinion. That the bond/ability are not identical doesn't change the fact they exist and are quite strong. Drogon has come to Dany in dream on several occasion (teaching her how to hatch the dragons), wargs don't seem to dream in that way, they can see through their animals eyes but they don't dream of them (with prophetic implications). Let's quote the author of the books again:

A: There is no history/precedent for someone warging a dragon. There is a rich history of the mythical bond between dragon and rider. There have been instances of dragons responding to their riders even from very far away (hmm) which shows it is a true and very strong bond. We will learn more about this. Keep reading (we hear keep writing from the back of the room).

Well said :)

[Buried Treasure]

The most potent form of magic available to Dany was not her Targaryen blood but her life- giving force as a mother. Others in this thread have already touched on the idea of the baby's life force going to give life to the dragons after the events in the maegi's tent, but the actual bond began much earlier. As a non- pregnant Targaryen woman she felt nothing special about the dragon eggs but at around the time she conceived she first stated to feel the heat within the eggs.

Her magic for hatching the dragons was not gained from generations of exposure to similar magic - it seems highly unlikely any past dragonlords ever successfully hatched them from dead eggs when they had fresh viable eggs. Her magic was based in the integral life-giving power all women possess when pregnant.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

So, take a look at those we see perform/ engage with magic on page. Look at the Undying, Bloodraven, the warning about spending too much time in an animal's skin, the way the Red priests seem to not quite be fully human anymore, the way Stannis was egregiously drained, and so forth. I think it's clear that magic does something to your humanity. Ran said "magical radiation" earlier. I'm suggesting something similar-- that exposure to magic changes you.

In the most basic, abstract terms, what I'm suggesting is that once upon a time, an ordinary human decided to make a blood sacrifice. This split blood tapped into the stream of magic, and this human got himself power. Continued use of magic changed him over time. And his progeny took up magic and that changed them over time. And so on, developing a "magic gene mutation" for lack of a better term. (I know this looks ridiculous, but it kind of makes sense, thematically as well).

So, yes, given that Dany had dragon dreams, we know she had a trait of sorts. And it seems like the Starks do as well (and Varamyr, Borroq, etc).

But, importantly, I'm also saying that I suspect that not having a conditioned "magic gene" might not preclude you from performing magic.

Yes I agree with that. Characters alive now in the books, could preform blood magic and they can be successful even if they are the first person in their family to do so. But I do not think that just anyone could come up and ride one of Dany's dragons. To do that you have to have the 'dragonlord magic gene' IMO. Same thing with Dany, I also believe that not just anyone could have walked up and preformed the pyre hatching. It took a dragonlord who had the 'magic gene' to make it work and that MMD contributed nothing except being herself a blood sacrifice.

[butterbumps!]

Yes I agree with that. Characters alive now in the books, could preform blood magic and they can be successful even if they are the first person in their family to do so. But I do not think that just anyone could come up and ride one of Dany's dragons. To do that you have to have the 'dragonlord magic gene' IMO. Same thing with Dany, I also believe that not just anyone could have walked up and preformed the pyre hatching. It took a dragonlord who had the 'magic gene' to make it work and that MMD contributed nothing except being herself a blood sacrifice.

Did Dany's ancestral blood cause the dragons to wake in a literal and direct sense? Or did her blood send her the dreams and confidence to make the sacrifice? idk, but taking ASOIAF as a whole, I get the sense that it might be the latter-- an advantage and belief over someone else, but not necessarily that she has a monopoly on this due to her blood.

Until we learn more about dragon-riding, I don't know if it's fair to say that not just anyone could ride those dragons. I'm very curious to see how that horn plays out. Use of the horn has a built-in blood sacrifice requirement. If a Greyjoy ends up riding one via becoming master of the horn, would that convince you it's not about a Valyrian magic gene?

[Suzanna Stormborn]

Did Dany's ancestral blood cause the dragons to wake in a literal and direct sense? Or did her blood send her the dreams and confidence to make the sacrifice? idk, but taking ASOIAF as a whole, I get the sense that it might be the latter-- an advantage and belief over someone else, but not necessarily that she has a monopoly on this due to her blood.

Until we learn more about dragon-riding, I don't know if it's fair to say that not just anyone could ride those dragons. I'm very curious to see how that horn plays out. Use of the horn has a built-in blood sacrifice requirement. If a Greyjoy ends up riding one via becoming master of the horn, would that convince you it's not about a Valyrian magic gene?

Well, yes and no, everything we have been discussing about dragons thus far does not include the horn. For me, the horn is a wild card, I have no idea what it does or what will happen when it is blown in the proximity of a dragon. I know that I've read that some of the ancient valyrians used the horns. My best guess is that, some of the dragonlord families used a ritual (like dany and the Pyre) to bond the dragons to their bloodline and that some of them could not make the bond work and instead used horns to bind the dragons. I also read that using the horn turns the dragon into a slave, they used the horns to make the dragons mine for precious metals or something........ So I dont think it would be a 'bond' like what Dany has. she even says "a dragon is not a slave". So I am quite certain she would reject the idea of a horn being used on one of her dragons. Actually it is going to be quite interesting when a horn does get blown. I mean Dany clearly has a bond with Drogon, but she couldnt order him to start mining for mythril. I guess the horns let you flat our give the dragons orders and then they are subservient??

So that would mean, some people are able to bond with the dragons through blood magic/ritual and for some it does not work and a horn is required. So Yes, someone who is not a Targ or Valyrian will probably be able to subdue/tame/ride a dragon via the horn. But my guess is that it wont be pretty, and the dragon wont take kindly to it. I imagine it will be more like Varamyr's warged bear. the bear hates him, he can feel it hating him, the bear does not want him inside of it, and as soon as he dies the bear goes on a nutso rampage and kills a bunch of people around it. I suspect that subduing a dragon with a horn will have much the same effect, it will obey you for the moment because it has no choice, but if you die or the horn gets destroyed or something then said dragon will go ballistic.

The horn makes the dragon into a slave, not a bonded friend like the way Dany is with Drogon or the stark are with the wolves. Those relationships are by choice. The horn is by force. So to answer your question, I still think that certain dragonlord blood is 'special' in bonding with a dragon and having it 'love' you. But with the aid of a horn, non-targs will probably be able to ride, but under the dragons duress.

[butterbumps!]

The horn makes the dragon into a slave, not a bonded friend like the way Dany is with Drogon or the stark are with the wolves. Those relationships are by choice. The horn is by force. So to answer your question, I still think the dragonlord blood is 'special' in bonding with a dragon and having it 'love' you. But with the aid of a horn, non-targs will probably be able to ride, but under the dragons duress.

But the horns are Valyrian in origin. Valyrians controlled their dragons with sorcery and horns. Which means these apparently specially-blooded dragonlords were using horns to bind their dragons. Despite having the apparently requisite blood.

Because of the circumstances of Dany's dragon hatching, it may well be the case that she has a special bond with at least 1 of the dragons. And I'd locate the source of this more on her sacrifice and nurturing than a necessary blood relationship. This isn't something I contest. It's more the requirement that only Targs/ Valyrians can ride because they have a monopoly on special magical biology or something.