[TWOIAF Spoilers] Inconsistency or Intentional?

[Ser Lepus]

It could also happen that being a dragonrider isn't dependant on the percentage of Targaryen/dragonrider blood. It could be like a gene. You get it from a dragonrider parent, or not, 50 % chance of getting it (I'm not speaking about a real gene, but about something that is passed down the same way) and no middle ground between having it or not.

If being a dragonrider works like a gene, and dragonriders didn't intermarry with other dragonriders, you have a 50 % of getting it from a dragonrider parent.

But if both parents are dragonriders, you get a 75 % chance.

But if dad or mom were lucky and got dragonrider "genes" from both sides, they have a 100 % chance of passing them down,

So a person with a remote dragonrider ancestor would have as low chance of being a dragonrider himself/herself, but it would exist. Most Targaryens from old times would have dragonrider "genes" from both sides, and they practiced incest to make sure it remained that way.

And again: I'm not speaking of real genes, I'm speaking of a quality that is inherited the same way as genes do.

[UnmaskedLurker]

Bastardry is subjetive. Most Westerosi would consider any child of Rhaegar and Lyanna a bastard, for example, because they don't accept polygamy. And I'm not sure dragons care about legitimacy; they allowed the dragonseeds to ride them.

This is not true. Yes, most of the people in Westeros seem to be against polygamy. But they do not consider the children of polygamous marriage not to be legitimate. Crastor's and Oldfather's multiple marriages are acknowledges as real marriages and their children as legitimate children. Children of "salt wives" of IB are considered legitimate children. No matter what they might personally think of polygamy, there is no evidence of anyone in Westeros ever stating that the children of second wives were not legitimate. Consider that--other than Maegor--every king after Aegon I (prior to RR) were descendants from Aegon's second wife.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

It could also happen that being a dragonrider isn't dependant on the percentage of Targaryen/dragonrider blood. It could be like a gene. You get it from a dragonrider parent, or not, 50 % chance of getting it (I'm not speaking about a real gene, but about something that is passed down the same way) and no middle ground between having it or not.

If being a dragonrider works like a gene, and dragonriders didn't intermarry with other dragonriders, you have a 50 % of getting it from a dragonrider parent.

But if both parents are dragonriders, you get a 75 % chance.

But if dad or mom were lucky and got dragonrider "genes" from both sides, they have a 100 % chance of passing them down,

So a person with a remote dragonrider ancestor would have as low chance of being a dragonrider himself/herself, but it would exist. Most Targaryens from old times would have dragonrider "genes" from both sides, and they practiced incest to make sure it remained that way.

And again: I'm not speaking of real genes, I'm speaking of a quality that is inherited the same way as genes do.

Yeah this is basically what I think, so we agree then, that the more Targ blood you have from dragonriding Targaryens, the more likely it is that you will be able to ride/tame (but it's not a certainty).

[Ser Lepus]

This is not true. Yes, most of the people in Westeros seem to be against polygamy. But they do not consider the children of polygamous marriage not to be legitimate. Crastor's and Oldfather's multiple marriages are acknowledges as real marriages and their children as legitimate children. Children of "salt wives" of IB are considered legitimate children. No matter what they might personally think of polygamy, there is no evidence of anyone in Westeros ever stating that the children of second wives were not legitimate. Consider that--other than Maegor--every king after Aegon I (prior to RR) were descendants from Aegon's second wife.

Maegor and his children and grandchildren had dragons. They were legitimate because dragons say so.

Craster's family is an unholy abomination to the eyes of the Westerosi. They are so worse than bastards that the legitimacy of his "marriages" is irrelevant. And anyway, when did Craster or his daughters-wives ever try to have their marriages acknowledged by Westerosi society? Have any of them claimed an inheritance, a surname, a sigil?

As for the children of "salt wives", we'll have to wait for the son of a salt wife to try to be acknowledged as legitimate by the Greenlanders. All the characters that are acknowledged as legitimate and nobleborn are children of rock wives.

And, as I said, bastardry cultural, and as such, relative. Maybe you can buy legitimacy for your bastard children in the Free Cities by paying a fee to the government. Maybe some group somewhere sees as bastards everybody whose parents who didn't follow a very specific local marriage ritual. Maybe people at Slaver's Bay consider null all marriages of slaves, and all their children bastards. The point is, dragons probably don't give a damn human customs, If they care about something, they care about biology. As I said, they allowed bastads to ride them.

EDIT: How would dragons even know if you are a bastard or not? Do they demand the Septon who performed the marriage ritual to come and tell them? Do they ask for the witness who did stand by the side of the groom and bride in front of the heart tree?

[RumHam]

This is not true. Yes, most of the people in Westeros seem to be against polygamy. But they do not consider the children of polygamous marriage not to be legitimate. Crastor's and Oldfather's multiple marriages are acknowledges as real marriages and their children as legitimate children. Children of "salt wives" of IB are considered legitimate children. No matter what they might personally think of polygamy, there is no evidence of anyone in Westeros ever stating that the children of second wives were not legitimate. Consider that--other than Maegor--every king after Aegon I (prior to RR) were descendants from Aegon's second wife.

I thought I wandered into the wrong thread for a minute...

[Ran]

Helled,

Hrm, usage is straight from George, but you're right. It seems when he went through the family tree -- the final family trees were the very last thing George provided, after a lot of the text (including the Westerlands) had been locked down -- he tweaked stuff, such as having Jason's child by Alys survive and go on to marry and so on.

I'll put in for a fix for the next print.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Viserys' year of birth is described in the world book as 276AC, yet in A Game of Thrones Dany mentions that Viserys was only 8 when he fled KL, thus in 283AC.

Being 8 in 283AC could mean he was born in 275AC (turned 8 that year) or 274AC (8 turning 9 that year), but not 276AC.

Was Dany then simply misremembering a year? Wouldn't it be a bit strange if she was suddenly mistaken in the amount of years she and Viserys differ in age?

[UnmaskedLurker]

Maegor and his children and grandchildren had dragons. They were legitimate because dragons say so.

Craster's family is an unholy abomination to the eyes of the Westerosi. They are so worse than bastards that the legitimacy of his "marriages" is irrelevant. And anyway, when did Craster or his daughters-wives ever try to have their marriages acknowledged by Westerosi society? Have any of them claimed an inheritance, a surname, a sigil?

As for the children of "salt wives", we'll have to wait for the son of a salt wife to try to be acknowledged as legitimate by the Greenlanders. All the characters that are acknowledged as legitimate and nobleborn are children of rock wives.

And, as I said, bastardry cultural, and as such, relative. Maybe you can buy legitimacy for your bastard children in the Free Cities by paying a fee to the government. Maybe some group somewhere sees as bastards everybody whose parents who didn't follow a very specific local marriage ritual. Maybe people at Slaver's Bay consider null all marriages of slaves, and all their children bastards. The point is, dragons probably don't give a damn human customs, If they care about something, they care about biology. As I said, they allowed bastads to ride them.

EDIT: How would dragons even know if you are a bastard or not? Do they demand the Septon who performed the marriage ritual to come and tell them? Do they ask for the witness who did stand by the side of the groom and bride in front of the heart tree?

I have no idea what point you are trying to make (and I think RumHam is suggesting--correctly--that we are really going off track for a thread dedicated to inconsistencies in the text so I will be brief). Of course bastards can ride a dragon. I never said they could not. We know they can. The point is whether Rhaegar's children by a second wife (Lyanna) would be considered a bastard. I do not believe they would (and more important, Rhaegar would not think so). Craster is criticized for the incest (marrying his daughters) and not the polygamy--and Oldfather is not criticized and had many wives. By the way, Maegor was the son of the first wife. Aenys and his progeny (all of the other kings after Aegon I other than Maegor) were descendants of the second wife.

[Mithras]

Whenever we try to impose some genetical rules to dragonriding, we end up with the circular logic.

For me, the only "benefit" of Targ blood can be the affinity gained by the dragons after being bred and trained by these purple-eyed people for 5000 years. This is a real phenomenon and can make sense.

As for the magical benefits of having Targ blood, I can count increased heat tolerance, strange dreams related to dragons and an increased potential to work magic. Given the highly possible unnatural origins of dragons, having Valyrian blood might be an ingredient in not taming/riding dragons but breeding/hatching them, as that is what really matters.

For me, everyone can ride a dragon if the conditions are right. The easiest way is to get a newly born hatchling and take care of it like you do for a puppy. It will be used to you. That is actually the same case with direwolf puppies. No Stark kid could have tamed an adult direwolf if they did not work out their gift with easy to bond puppies.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

Whenever we try to impose some genetical rules to dragonriding, we end up with the circular logic.

For me, the only "benefit" of Targ blood can be the affinity gained by the dragons after being bred and trained by these purple-eyed people for 5000 years. This is a real phenomenon and can make sense.

As for the magical benefits of having Targ blood, I can count increased heat tolerance, strange dreams related to dragons and an increased potential to work magic. Given the highly possible unnatural origins of dragons, having Valyrian blood might be an ingredient in not taming/riding dragons but breeding/hatching them, as that is what really matters.

For me, everyone can ride a dragon if the conditions are right. The easiest way is to get a newly born hatchling and take care of it like you do for a puppy. It will be used to you. That is actually the same case with direwolf puppies. No Stark kid could have tamed an adult direwolf if they did not work out their gift with easy to bond puppies.

Name change again huh?

I have had this argument with Apple before and I won it, also Ran sided with me when the two of them had the same argument, which was; That anyone could ride a dragon, but that no one has ever tried before.

This is crazy, how could no one have EVER tried before? Valyrians have been doing this for 5000 years, they have all had stable boys, servants, assistants, groomers, dragon-poop shovelers, dragon feeders, all sorts of people who would be required to be around the dragons all the time. Stands to reason that one or many of them would try to ride a dragon at some point right??? Curiosity and all that, but like I said earlier, if there was even ONE successful case of a non-Valyrian taming/riding a dragon it would be national news. Every maester would have heard of it, whoever did it would go down in history forever, it would be no secret. That's how we know it has not happened.

"Valyrians alone in the world were able to tame and subdue the dragons."

[Ser Lepus]

I have no idea what point you are trying to make (and I think RumHam is suggesting--correctly--that we are really going off track for a thread dedicated to inconsistencies in the text so I will be brief). Of course bastards can ride a dragon. I never said they could not. We know they can. The point is whether Rhaegar's children by a second wife (Lyanna) would be considered a bastard. I do not believe they would (and more important, Rhaegar would not think so). Craster is criticized for the incest (marrying his daughters) and not the polygamy--and Oldfather is not criticized and had many wives. By the way, Maegor was the son of the first wife. Aenys and his progeny (all of the other kings after Aegon I other than Maegor) were descendants of the second wife.

Re-read my posts. I was speaking of how spread dragonrider blood is, and how there are many more potential dragonriders that we ever thought. It was you who said that bastards don't count, and I answered that bastardry is cultural, not biological, and dragons don't care that.

But, as @RumHam said, we are going off track.

[Maia]

For me, everyone can ride a dragon if the conditions are right. The easiest way is to get a newly born hatchling and take care of it like you do for a puppy. It will be used to you.

But we have seen with Dany's handmaids that it is not true. They have helped her to feed and care for dragons since they day there were hatched, yet there is no special bonds between them and the dragons. They won't become dragonriders.

However, dragons liked Brown Ben Plumm immediately upon meeting him for the first time.

.

That is actually the same case with direwolf puppies. No Stark kid could have tamed an adult direwolf if they did not work out their gift with easy to bond puppies.

But raising puppies wouldn't have allowed them to bond if they didn't have the gift in the first place. Bloodraven says so and he is plugged into the weirnet, which contains knowledge of the CoTF on the subject.

[Mithras]

As posted for the millionth time, one cannot produce a single reasonable explanation about how Gormon Massey and Steffon Darklyn were allowed to try to mount a dragon under the supervision of Rhaenyra.

Name change again huh?

I have had this argument with Apple before and I won it, also Ran sided with me when the two of them had the same argument, which was; That anyone could ride a dragon, but that no one has ever tried before.

This is crazy, how could no one have EVER tried before? Valyrians have been doing this for 5000 years, they have all had stable boys, servants, assistants, groomers, dragon-poop shovelers, dragon feeders, all sorts of people who would be required to be around the dragons all the time. Stands to reason that one or many of them would try to ride a dragon at some point right??? Curiosity and all that, but like I said earlier, if there was even ONE successful case of a non-Valyrian taming/riding a dragon it would be national news. Every maester would have heard of it, whoever did it would go down in history forever, it would be no secret. That's how we know it has not happened.

"Valyrians alone in the world were able to tame and subdue the dragons."

The Winged Knight rode a dragon.

Perhaps finding a hatchling was not as easy as one might think. Perhaps many people tried to tame adult dragons and failed miserably.

But we have seen with Dany's handmaids that it is not true. They have helped her to feed and care for dragons since they day there were hatched, yet there is no special bonds between them and the dragons. They won't become dragonriders.
However, dragons liked Brown Ben Plumm immediately upon meeting him for the first time.

Did they?

And where is it stated that they tried to mount Viserion or Rhaegal? Without trying, how can you be sure that they cannot be dragonriders?

[UnmaskedLurker]

Name change again huh?

I have had this argument with Apple before and I won it, also Ran sided with me when the two of them had the same argument, which was; That anyone could ride a dragon, but that no one has ever tried before.

This is crazy, how could no one have EVER tried before? Valyrians have been doing this for 5000 years, they have all had stable boys, servants, assistants, groomers, dragon-poop shovelers, dragon feeders, all sorts of people who would be required to be around the dragons all the time. Stands to reason that one or many of them would try to ride a dragon at some point right??? Curiosity and all that, but like I said earlier, if there was even ONE successful case of a non-Valyrian taming/riding a dragon it would be national news. Every maester would have heard of it, whoever did it would go down in history forever, it would be no secret. That's how we know it has not happened.

"Valyrians alone in the world were able to tame and subdue the dragons."

Even more important evidence is that not ALL Valyrians could ride dragons--only dragonlord families (I think 40) and Targs are the only ones that survived after the Doom. So at this point no other Valyrians can ride dragons--only Targs. If blood was not relevant, at some point, some Valyrian other than one from the dragonlord families would have successfully ridden a dragon. But none has. Why, because the "blood magic" that allowed dragon binding must have been performed in a way that only bound the dragons to the specific dragonlord houses. If blood were not relevant, at some point over the thousands of years, as you point out, someone would have tried it successfully. We have novellas that show Targs almost accidentally binding with a dragon. If blood did not matter, someone at some point would have done the same thing and become bound to a dragon. But we have ZERO reports of this happening--because it cannot happen because blood magic was necessary to form the bond and Targs are the only ones left with the blood that was part of that ritual. All those years of the other Valyrians not being able to bind with a dragon--someone living in Valyria that was not part of a dragonlord family would at least accidentally bound to a dragon. But it never happened. Why? Because it cannot.

Re-read my posts. I was speaking of how spread dragonrider blood is, and how there are many more potential dragonriders that we ever thought. It was you who said that bastards don't count, and I answered that bastardry is cultural, not biological, and dragons don't care that.

But, as @RumHam said, we are going off track.

Sorry. I must have taken a statement out of context. Of course dragonseed bastards have the ability to ride a dragon under the right circumstances. The novellas make this 100% clear. I was merely stating that polygamy =/= bastard.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

As posted for the millionth time, one cannot produce a single reasonable explanation about how Gormon Massey and Steffon Darklyn were allowed to try to mount a dragon under the supervision of Rhaenyra.

The Winged Knight rode a dragon.

Perhaps finding a hatchling was not as easy as one might think. Perhaps many people tried to tame adult dragons and failed miserably.

Did they?

And where is it stated that they tried to mount Viserion or Rhaegal? Without trying, how can you be sure that they cannot be dragonriders?

Ok ok, tell me again where these passages are? I want to check them tonight and get back to you. The ones about Rhaenyra/Massey/Darklyn and about the Winged Knight, please.

But keep in mind that we are talking about taming and subduing/bonding. Not just standing in close proximity or riding double with a dragonlord one time. PATQ shows that if a dragonlord is on the back of a dragon, he can pull on another passenger.

[Mithras]

Even more important evidence is that not ALL Valyrians could ride dragons--only dragonlord families (I think 40) and Targs are the only ones that survived after the Doom. So at this point no other Valyrians can ride dragons--only Targs. If blood was not relevant, at some point, some Valyrian other than one from the dragonlord families would have successfully ridden a dragon. But none has. Why, because the "blood magic" that allowed dragon binding must have been performed in a way that only bound the dragons to the specific dragonlord houses. If blood were not relevant, at some point over the thousands of years, as you point out, someone would have tried it successfully. We have novellas that show Targs almost accidentally binding with a dragon. If blood did not matter, someone at some point would have done the same thing and become bound to a dragon. But we have ZERO reports of this happening--because it cannot happen because blood magic was necessary to form the bond and Targs are the only ones left with the blood that was part of that ritual. All those years of the other Valyrians not being able to bind with a dragon--someone living in Valyria that was not part of a dragonlord family would at least accidentally bound to a dragon. But it never happened. Why? Because it cannot.

Sorry but this is a lame reasoning. You are making false assumptions where we do not know certain things about the history of dragons. George said that they were once all over the world. When? How did they vanish? Without having good answers for such questions, what you say is similar to "hey look, 13.6 billion years is a long time, all the planets should be teeming with life that is specialized to live according to local conditions."

[UnmaskedLurker]

As posted for the millionth time, one cannot produce a single reasonable explanation about how Gormon Massey and Steffon Darklyn were allowed to try to mount a dragon under the supervision of Rhaenyra.

Ok, Mr. Paper Waver/AntZ/Mormont's craven, I will take you up on the challenge.

Notice that both of them were burned to death and did not succeed in riding a dragon. But they are in a war and there is a call out for dragonseed. Two brave men believe they have what it take to ride a dragon. The "queen" (if you take her side she was queen) is desperate for dragon riders. The success of the war is at stake, Maybe Rhaenyra knows you need Targ blood but is just completely desperate or maybe she is unaware that Targ blood is needed. Either way is a plausible explanation. When your life could depend on something being true--no matter how unlikely--it is easy to convince oneself that it is true.

Now if they were able to bind to a dragon, you would have your proof (unless there was some suggestion of a Targ ancestor). But as it is, to me, this is proof the other way. Here were two very brave and capable men who were supervised by an expert in dragon riding, and nevertheless, the attempt failed. Why did it fail? Because they had no Targ blood.

[Mithras]

Ok ok, tell me again where these passages are? I want to check them tonight and get back to you. The ones about Rhaenyra/Massey/Darklyn and about the Winged Knight, please.

Dragons are not horses. They do not easily accept men upon their backs, and when angered or threatened, they attack. Sixteen men lost their lives during an attempt to become dragonriders. Three times that number were burned or maimed. Steffon Darklyn was burned to death whilst attempting to mount the dragon Seasmoke. Lord Gormon Massey suffered the same fate when approaching Vermithor.

“We cannot ask these men to shed blood with us, then kill them.” Bold John Roxton settled the dispute. “We kill the bastards now,” he said. “Afterward, let the bravest of us claim their dragons and fly them into battle.” No man in that cellar doubted that Roxton was speaking of himself.

Afterward, Lord Unwin Peake offered a thousand golden dragons to any knight of noble birth who could claim Silverwing. Three men came forth. When the first had his arm torn off and the second burned to death, the third man reconsidered.

The first Ser Artys Arryn supposedly rode upon a huge falcon (possibly a distorted memory of dragonriders seen from afar, Archmaester Perestan suggests). Armies of eagles fought at his command.

Spoiler

Something was moving atop one of them, he saw. A dragon, but which one? At this distance, it could as easily have been an eagle. A very big eagle.

[Ser Lepus]

Whenever we try to impose some genetical rules to dragonriding, we end up with the circular logic.

For me, the only "benefit" of Targ blood can be the affinity gained by the dragons after being bred and trained by these purple-eyed people for 5000 years. This is a real phenomenon and can make sense.

As for the magical benefits of having Targ blood, I can count increased heat tolerance, strange dreams related to dragons and an increased potential to work magic. Given the highly possible unnatural origins of dragons, having Valyrian blood might be an ingredient in not taming/riding dragons but breeding/hatching them, as that is what really matters.

For me, everyone can ride a dragon if the conditions are right. The easiest way is to get a newly born hatchling and take care of it like you do for a puppy. It will be used to you. That is actually the same case with direwolf puppies. No Stark kid could have tamed an adult direwolf if they did not work out their gift with easy to bond puppies.

I used to strongly dislike the idea of Targaryen being special snowflakes and that only them had the ability to ride dragons, but now that we know that there are so many people with dragonrider blood around, it doesn't bother me anymore. It's just a another magical skill that some lucky people have, like skinchanging, prophecy or fire manipulation.

Sorry. I must have taken a statement out of context. Of course dragonseed bastards have the ability to ride a dragon under the right circumstances. The novellas make this 100% clear. I was merely stating that polygamy =/= bastard.

It was probably my fault. I should have pointed that I was joking when I called "secret Targs" all those potential dragonriders.

[Ran]

Take it to another thread, please. It's off-topic.