[Book Spoilers] EP509 Discussion

[Stannistician]

Funny thing, Stannis (book Stannis, I mean), is practically an atheist. Or at least, very agnostic.

This is an important point. I think one of book Stannis' major flaws is his willingness to use religion and religious people for his own ends when he doesn't really believe himself. I think a better story would have been Stannis getting burned by this (pardon the pun) by having Shireen sacrificed behind his back by the very religious folks that he has been using. Irony at its best (or worst). Stannis would still have to live with the consequences of his actions in this scenario (placating to religion for his own ends), but it still plays into the doomed tragic figure that book Stannis is. I hope this is the way the book story goes.

But that would be far too complex for D & D. Its much easier to paint him as a religious fanatic burning his own daughter in order to show the evils of religion. They laid the ground work for this back in season 2 by always playing that evil music during all of Stannis' scenes, among other things. I think they made Mel too one dimensional as well. All of my shownly friends think she is pure evil, along with Stannis (even before this last episode). They kept asking me why Jon Snow would even associate with these wicked people.

[roxWolfox]

Forgive me, but I honestly don't understand how being hungry can make Stan's scouts / guards miss seeing Ramsey and his ninjas infiltrate the camp. Does hunger make you blind?

If Ramsey was detected, they could have stopped them before so much damage was done.

No, but mild hypothermia does make you lethargic and easily confused.

How do you guys feel about Dorne? I think it's just awful. It's no more than filler, and they turned the Sand Snakes into jokes.

In all honesty, I found Dorne to be a sign that the author was still working on how to bring the Ice and Fire elements together (as the 5 year gap is nowhere to be seen); rather, he chose to 'fill in' the geography and history of Westeros. I have little interest in it.

Well, in the show itself, they resisted a whole year. And his wife was also there. So, it's not like he wouldn't make others suffer the same he is suffering. (in the books, I suppose Renly was there too). So, the argument of "he did it for his men" does not even work here.

As it seems I'm the only person on this board who has actually lived in areas where the winters are extremely cold (minus 35 C being the norm along with windchill factors), I can tell anyone who lives in the south (as I have done for years) that it is much easier to survive in a mild climate as long as you have a readily available source of water. Frostbite, hypothermia, starvation, lack of dry clothing/tents/blankets will all kill within hours or a couple of days without medical intervention.

Ramsay's pack are well-rested, well-fed, hydrated, and are resistant to the weather in that they are prepared for it and have lived in it all their lives.

No one (except my husband) understands why I cannot go outside in the summer where we currently live. After a few minutes in the sun my skin becomes sunburned and I become dizzy and nauseous. I'm not genetically built for hot climes. Put me in a freezer during our summers, and I'm fully functional. That's just from being born in the Arctic from peoples who have lived in the Arctic for thousands of years. The Westerosi northerners are no different, whereas Stannis and his followers are used to a much milder environment.

[Joe Pesci]

Forgive me, but I honestly don't understand how being hungry can make Stan's scouts / guards miss seeing Ramsey and his ninjas infiltrate the camp. Does hunger make you blind?

If Ramsey was detected, they could have stopped them before so much damage was done.

If you factor in the soldiers on guard being hungry, tired, and freezing, it is totally feasible for a small group of men to get into the camp. If they are spread out in groups of two around the whole perimeter, then it really wouldn't be hard, especially with the snow hindering eyesight. As an example, during the Battle of the Bulge, there were instances of German soldiers accidentally wandered undetected during the night past the Allied lines and had no clue they had done so until being captured due to the inclement weather. So it could realistically be done.

Now all the fires lighting up at once, I got no answer :dunno:

[The Ned's Little Girl]

The thing is either the book is the spoiler or the show is. If you believe the show is true to the book, then you don't need confirmation. If you don't, then you shouldn't care. And there are people who still don't even when it's confirmed.

If you don't want spoilers at all, stay out of the spoiler threads.

Soooooo not what I was saying. I can "believe the show is true to the book" or not, but still D&D have no business confirming one way or the other.

Both they and GRRM have been saying for a long time now that, although they will arrive in the same place at the end, the show and the book will be taking greatly different roads to get there. The only logical purpose in handling it that way is exactly so the show doesn't spoil the books, so viewers won't know which events are in the books and which are D&D's own version.

And hey! Thanks for the advice on staying out of spoiler threads! Not that I was asking for any. I am a grownup, after all, and perfectly capable of deciding for myself what to read or not.

[TheKitttenGuard]

This is an important point. I think one of book Stannis' major flaws is his willingness to use religion and religious people for his own ends when he doesn't really believe himself. I think a better story would have been Stannis getting burned by this (pardon the pun) by having Shireen sacrificed behind his back by the very religious folks that he has been using. Irony at its best (or worst). Stannis would still have to live with the consequences of his actions in this scenario (placating to religion for his own ends), but it still plays into the doomed tragic figure that book Stannis is. I hope this is the way the book story goes.

But that would be far too complex for D & D. Its much easier to paint him as a religious fanatic burning his own daughter in order to show the evils of religion. They laid the ground work for this back in season 2 by always playing that evil music during all of Stannis' scenes, among other things. I think they made Mel too one dimensional as well. All of my shownly friends think she is pure evil, along with Stannis (even before this last episode). They kept asking me why Jon Snow would even associate with these wicked people.

What you say will be very much within what occurs to Stannis many time in the books.

For me it gets quite tiring. It is always some plausible denialibity yet he will benefit from the act itself.

I do enjoy that on the show he owns what he does. I understand the difference but I enjoy the fanatic in many ways than the book pragmatist.

[Grail King]

As far as the 20 guys, all they really had to do was show 2 or 3 men in snow leopard skins crawling on their stomachs or something of that nature.

As far as next week well the ice is melting, the snow stopped so it will make his men believe the sacrificed worked, unfortunately Stannis sold his soul to the devil and if he doesn't die Sunday he will early next year.

[Hos the Hostage]

Concerning wine.... "I don't partake".

Both Roose and Tycho have uttered these exact words when talking about drinking wine.

A connection? Both Faceless Men?

Neither are Facelessmen. How can you connect non-existent dots?

I think Mycroft (aka Tycho) was telling Mance that the Iron Bank can't be swayed by offer of Reach's riches or other personal favors.

[Lovely Lyanna]

What is a king without an heir?

Queen Elizabeth did fine without one. The main problem with an heir is that an heir provides someone to rally around if people are unhappy with their king or queen. Elizabeth understood this. Look at Mary Queen of Scots. The nobles did not need her anymore once they could rally around James VI.

[Cas Stark]

Queen Elizabeth did fine without one. The main problem with an heir is that an heir provides someone to rally around if people are unhappy with their king or queen. Elizabeth understood this. Look at Mary Queen of Scots. The nobles did not need her anymore once they could rally around James VI.

I guess, except for that whole, end of the Tudor dynasty thing, caused by her not having an heir.

[sb.69]

I guess, except for that whole, end of the Tudor dynasty thing, caused by her not having an heir.

The Dark Stannis came out of Mel could count? Technically that thing has Targaryen blood.

[Dracarys Stormborn]

How is Stannis a "villain"? Yes, he burned his own daughter but he already wanted to burn his own nephew. He doesn't see himself as evil, he just sees himself as Westeros' last hope.

There are plenty of villains who think what they're doing is right or for the greater good.

[Lord Freddy Blackfyre]

Adolf Hitler thought that he was doing the right thing for the greatest good ...."that's what evil people say when they do evil things"

[Dracarys Stormborn]

Queen Elizabeth did fine without one. The main problem with an heir is that an heir provides someone to rally around if people are unhappy with their king or queen. Elizabeth understood this. Look at Mary Queen of Scots. The nobles did not need her anymore once they could rally around James VI.

And the main problem with not having an heir is that when you die, there will be a big issue about who takes your place. Though I wouldn't compare Elizabeth to Stannis. There's a difference between never having a child and killing your only one. And wasn't she the last Tudor because of this?

Stannis cares about his line, one of the reasons why he said he saved Shireen was because she was his daughter, a Baratheon. So I guess Queen Elizabeth didn't mind ending her family's line and dynasty, but Stannis has shown us that he's not like that.

The Dark Stannis came out of Mel could count? Technically that thing has Targaryen blood.

You're probably joking (or at least I hope you are) but any child Mel had, shadow or not, would be a bastard as she isn't a noble or even a native of Westeros. I don't see Stan having anymore children, so he will probably die without an heir because of his stupidity. Selyse can't have anymore children. And I can't see any noble marrying their daughters off to Stannis since he's proven that he has no qualms about killing his own children in the name of a foreign god.

Edited June 11, 2015 by SeventhReign

[Katjushka]

Apparently it is:

http://www.practicalsurvivor.com/basiccoldweathersurvival

Those were experienced people using modern equipment that had issues getting a fire started in cold weather.

Well hey, I'm just a lady from Finland and I can get a fire going in the winter.. Not that hard really when you know what you need for it an how to use them. The whole point of Ramsay and his 20 men succeeding is that they're from the north, Stannis and his men are not.

[#teamNightking]

I think if they wanted to sell the 20 men thing better they should have made the storm more visibly worse. Like can't see your hand in front of your face from blowing snow...sell sword sentries are huddled around fires for warmth not paying attention.

Ramsay's Rambos strike just before dawn in white camo with lots of oil and combustibles and in groups of 2. Totally believable? Better than what we got. Or hell, just show that Mel did it, Ramsay got lost on the way. Hmmm maybe thats why the tents burst into flame with no one around?

Oh, it wouldn't have hurt for a couple of them to have been killed or captured either. But hey, it's Ramsay...someday, he shall sit the Iron Throne! Well at this rate of success anyway.

Edited June 11, 2015 by Wsc44

[Cubarey]

And the main problem with not having an heir is that when you die, there will be a big issue about who takes your place. Though I wouldn't compare Elizabeth to Stannis. There's a difference between never having a child and killing your only one. And wasn't she the last Tudor because of this?

Stannis cares about his line, one of the reasons why he said he saved Shireen was because she was his daughter, a Baratheon. So I guess Queen Elizabeth didn't mind ending her family's line and dynasty, but Stannis has shown us that he's not like that.

You're probably joking (or at least I hope you are) but any child Mel had, shadow or not, would be a bastard as she isn't a noble or even a native of Westeros. I don't see Stan having anymore children, so he will probably die without an heir because of his stupidity. Selyse can't have anymore children. And I can't see any noble marrying their daughters off to Stannis since he's proven that he has no qualms about killing his own children in the name of a foreign god.

Really? Stannis wins and he is in need of an heir, every noble house is going to being throwing their daughters in front of him. Sure, he is a man that could do anything he sees necessary, so what, nobles are quite ready to sell their daughters (and sons for that matter) for political gain. The daughter could get killed but she might bare the next kin that would be their nephew. Reward would be quite worth the risk.

[Cubarey]

And the main problem with not having an heir is that when you die, there will be a big issue about who takes your place. Though I wouldn't compare Elizabeth to Stannis. There's a difference between never having a child and killing your only one. And wasn't she the last Tudor because of this?

Stannis cares about his line, one of the reasons why he said he saved Shireen was because she was his daughter, a Baratheon. So I guess Queen Elizabeth didn't mind ending her family's line and dynasty, but Stannis has shown us that he's not like that.

You're probably joking (or at least I hope you are) but any child Mel had, shadow or not, would be a bastard as she isn't a noble or even a native of Westeros. I don't see Stan having anymore children, so he will probably die without an heir because of his stupidity. Selyse can't have anymore children. And I can't see any noble marrying their daughters off to Stannis since he's proven that he has no qualms about killing his own children in the name of a foreign god.

Really? Stannis wins and he is in need of an heir, every noble house is going to being throwing their daughters in front of him. Sure, he is a man that could do anything he sees necessary, so what, nobles are quite ready to sell their daughters (and sons for that matter) for political gain. The daughter could get killed but she might bare the next kin that would be their nephew. Reward would be quite worth the risk.

Adolf Hitler thought that he was doing the right thing for the greatest good ...."that's what evil people say when they do evil things"

But Hitler did not have a Wizard that had proof he had God's ear.

[Cubarey]

Queen Elizabeth did fine without one. The main problem with an heir is that an heir provides someone to rally around if people are unhappy with their king or queen. Elizabeth understood this. Look at Mary Queen of Scots. The nobles did not need her anymore once they could rally around James VI.

Of course if you have the interest of the realm you want to have an heir especially one who has the legitimazy and support to prevent a civil war. Queen Elizabeth's rule at the end was a bit chaotic and if not for James England would have likely ened in another series of civil wars.

[Tyu-Chuck]

There is those who thinks its impossible for the book Stannis to do it and others who think he will unquestionably.... there is enough proof to support both depending on how you interpret his motives, so enter in extensive raving arguments is just futile.... we need oly to accept the opionion of the other

I really thinks that he won't gonna do it.... nothing on his arc have showed that he is capable of sacrificing his own daughter fo a number of reasons:

1) He sacrificed only people who wronged him somehow:

Lord Alester Florent tried to make peace with the Lannister (and give Shireen as a hostage);

Guncer Sunglass and Lord Rambton's 2 sons were killed not by Stannis, but Selyse and Melisandre while Stannis was not at Dragonstone during the Blackwater, and even then they have defiled orders, the first decided to abandon Stannis' cause because he didin't want to accept R'hllor (he was punished not for the religion, but for the treason of abandoning his king) and the two brothers because they refused to let Stannis burn the Seven statues, and tried to stop it by force.

Renly tried to stole the throne that was rightfully his, its simple.... its war, they used the weapons they have at hand..... and if you believe that Renly were not planning on killing Stannis as well, read the book again and see for yourself

About Edric (Gendry, in the show), it was him who asked the proof of the power of kingsblood, not Davos and it took almost the entire 3th book for Melisandre to convince him to do it, and even then it was a nephew that he barely knew, not his daughter

Mance Rayder was an deserter of the Night's Watch.... if you don't agree with this read the Bran's first chapter from the first book were Ned Stark execute a man for the same reason....

Last, but not least, during the march to Winterfell, were on the show he sacrificed his own daughter, on the books he refuses to sacrifice anyone but a group of soldiers that resorted to canibalism... he refuses to sacrifice Asha (who has kingsblood, by the way) and only considers sacrifice Theon because of the murder of "Bran" and "Rickon"..... the Karstarks have the choice to admit their treason and die by beheading or to deny and burn......

2) He is constantly saying about his duty with her and her rights as his heir:

"It is not a question of wanting. The throne is mine, as Robert's heir. That is law. After me, it must pass to my daughter, unless Selyse should finally give me a son. I am king. Wants do not enter into it. I have a duty to my daughter. To the realm. Even to Robert. He loved me but little, I know, yet he was my brother."

"You will avenge my death, and seat my daughter on the iron throne. Or die in the attempt"

3) Its not even close to compare a daughter to a nephew he barely knew, a brother that tried to steal everithing from him and to the other examples that I mentioned

4) and remeber, most of his bannermen follow other religions.... sacrifice his daughter means lose these men

I will not say that is impossible for him to sacrifice his daughter.... its only very unlikely.... it will take much more then the reasons of the show for he to do it.... and I not saying it will be forgivable, but will be much more fitting to his character development than this ridiculous portrait that D&D made of him.... he is a grey character, and the fact that there is people who defend him and other who criticize him demonstrate it.... the show made him a darker character, and and its not in GRRM style to do it....

Geographically, he is not close to his daughter..... he took the entire 5th book to reach Winterfell.... but we have 2 books ahead of us, and its not impossible for them to reunite on WoW, I will admit, just very difficult due to winter and low supplies

I can think it happening as Nissa Nissa part of the prophecy, the ultimate sacrifice to save mankind, but nothing in the books show that Stannis believes he is AAR, in fact he said he doesn't believe in any gods and is just using Mel's magic in his favor... but you never know with GRRM.... other option is Melisandre and Selyse, after the pink letter, try to sacrifice Shireen to ressurect AA, but ending ressurecting Jon....but what they will do after finding out that Stannis is not AA (that much I'm sure), and that he never died, I have no ideia.... but again, you never know with GRRM

The only way for us to find out is reading the book.....

Edited June 11, 2015 by Tyu-Chuck

[Ross2013]

...

And yeah, I know absolutely that no audience is going to care or be vested in Stannis any longer now that he killed his daughter, so I hope and expect the show to kill him ASAP, because nobody will be interested in rooting for him and he's not colorful enough to be a fun villain like Ramsay.

I'm sure that we're being led to Brienne killing Stannis, and everyone will not only now accept it, but actually like it.