Jump to content

Are the Umbers up to something?


The Old Tongue

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Sand11751 said:

Someone actually said that LF suddenly became the stupidest man in Westeros for a couple of episodes? Wow, I guess I am expecting more consistency of the characters than can be had. Christ, D&D - do they just forget shit from episode to episode?

So what's your theory of why the Umbers would give up Rickon?

Really, so when the fake out is revealed viewers will be surprised. It could be a nothing it could be a big gamble, who knows.

1. There were some weird things there. Didn't Cogman say the GreatJohn was alive after the Red Wedding.? Now he's dead, or is he?

2. No fealty pledged. 

3. We pretty much know there is going to be a Northern Lord loyal to house Stark that double crosses the Boltons/Freys. Could it be Umber, maybe?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People believing in the Umber fake out are unbelievably optimistic.  No way you give a psychopath like Ramsay the last known living heir to your liege Lord if you still support them. Ramsey already flayed Lord Cerwyn "living" as well as his wife and another over taxes.  Also killed his own father, stepmom, and baby brother.  If the show was being realistic and consistent , he's already flaying Rickon and a part of him will be in the pink letter...  And the reason Umber doesn't kneel to Ramsey is because he's a badass just like his father was. He ain't gonna sugarcoat a thing. He doesn't respect or like Ramsey or the Karstarks. And the ONLY reason he's there is because he needs help vs the wildlings. 

Spoiler

Plus the casting leaks called for a Northern Lord in his 60's who turns sides and gives a stirring speech. That'll be Manderly and the "north remembers". Umber is the Lord with a "deep hatred". For wildlings...  I'm guessing the "new" Lord Cerwyn who "paid his taxes" after his father was flayed by Ramsey will be the young Northern Lord thrust into a position of power before he was ready.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OMG this is soooo irritating. On the one hand you have D&D, and everything people have said about them is pretty damn accurate. They hack write when they create, using every trope that GRRM stood on it s head. They had a damn kid with the sight before Osha and Rickon went off, no concerns then of course. Now we have an Umber who will not bow yield or kneel, but allegedly kills Shaggy off screen (D&D are hacks) and brings the last known living Stark male Heir to Ramsey. It is sooo frustrating.

 

Everyone saying that this is going to end badly for Rickon is probably right, even though it is horrible lazy writing, and just tears the guts out of GRRM's work. Why should I expect any different :rolleyes: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It isn't necessary to think there's a "fake-out" going on -- the show has had to move in its own direction for obvious reasons (GRRM: quit playing with those figurines and get to typing), so it's entirely possible that in the show the Umbers and Karstarks are (semi-) loyal to the Boltons. And the show still has yet to reveal how the Manderly thing will play out.

Rickon is with Ramsey and Shaggy Dog is dead, I think it's obvious.

But just let it play out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a book reader, so I'm still hoping that the Umber's have something up their sleeve. A few things to consider. 

1. Perhaps Rickon going to Winterfell wasn't the Smalljohn's idea, but it was Rickon's? After all, if the Umber's were still Stark loyalists, they would have to obey their liege lord (technically Bran is their liege lord but he could be considered dead since he went north of the wall). Don't ask me why Rickon would want to go because I have no idea. Just a thought.

2. The wildlings are not a threat to the Umbers. Smalljohn said multiple times that a Stark bastard let them through and that he could also lead a wildling army down south. Why would Jon allow his army to destroy the Last Hearth if they have been protecting his half brother this entire time? This information would just have to get to Jon (if he was leading the army and they weren't raiding) and the battle would never take place. In this sense, the Umber's don't need the Bolton's support. 

All in all, everything is face value and Rickon and Osha are dead. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am also in the "the Umbers are actually plotting against the Boltons" camp. Why give up Rickon? To not end up an oathbreaker, and because it DOES have advantages (see below). It's a huge risk. But it is necessary to get this close to Ramsay.

I suppose the Manderlys may then turn out to be the only house "openly" supporting the Starks, i.e. siding with Jon in the likely battle of the bastards. Once again, for this, it also makes sense to bring Rickon to the Boltons first, if the Umbers actually support the Starks: have news get to the Manderlys that the last remaining stark heir has been found - so Manderly moves out with his army in an attempt to safe him. Battle starts with Ramsay, Karstarks and Umbers on the one side, Jon, Wildlings and Manderly (plus some others like Mormont, if that's what Davos was doing there) on the other. Ramsay might feel somewhat safe. Umbers turn on him. Ramsay loses.

So, once again: of course it is insanely risky to put Rickon there. But if the above mentioned is their plan, I don't think there's any way around it to make it seem credible (that the Umbers support Ramsay while, in fact, they will betray him). The Umbers and Manderlys may have considered going openly against Ramsay from the start, but, who knows, maybe for fear of 20 good men (;)) may have decided that this was the safer way to ensure that the battle is actually won. After all, if you have the heir but lose the battle, the heir is definitely done for. Of course if you win the battle but lose the heir over it, that's not any better. All I'm saying is that for the loyal Northern lords, there IS a trade-off, you lose some, but you win some: putting Rickon at risk significantly increases the chances of winning the battle by unexpected turncloaks. It's definitely not a "lose-lose" situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see it.  Its far too risky to turn the last known male Stark over to a man who the Umbers know just murdered his own father and half-brother.   If the Umbers are playing Ramsay falsely,  their plan is exceedingly and unnecessarily dangerous.    

More likely,  I think the show Umbers main loyalty is to their own survival,  and if that means handing over Rickon Stark to Ramsay in order to secure the Boltons' help against the Wildlings south of the wall,   that's what they're going to do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Captain Hype Train said:

I'm a book reader, so I'm still hoping that the Umber's have something up their sleeve. A few things to consider. 

1. Perhaps Rickon going to Winterfell wasn't the Smalljohn's idea, but it was Rickon's? After all, if the Umber's were still Stark loyalists, they would have to obey their liege lord (technically Bran is their liege lord but he could be considered dead since he went north of the wall). Don't ask me why Rickon would want to go because I have no idea. Just a thought.

2. The wildlings are not a threat to the Umbers. Smalljohn said multiple times that a Stark bastard let them through and that he could also lead a wildling army down south. Why would Jon allow his army to destroy the Last Hearth if they have been protecting his half brother this entire time? This information would just have to get to Jon (if he was leading the army and they weren't raiding) and the battle would never take place. In this sense, the Umber's don't need the Bolton's support. 

All in all, everything is face value and Rickon and Osha are dead. 

My sweet summer child...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I want to believe in the Umbers and the GNC, I'm afraid we are all projecting what we know from the books into the show.
Show!Ramsay is not the dimwitted psychopath he is in the books, just as the Smalljon isn't loyal to his lord and his father (not to mention he's not lacking a head).
For all we know, the whole North except for the Umbers and the Karstarks died at the Red Wedding. There are no politics or scheming simply because there's no one left to scheme with. Except for Allmighty Ramsay, of course.

So yeah, perhaps that was a common wolf's head. Perhaps the Umbers really are against Ramsay. Perhaps D&D will surprise us and reveal a grand conspiracy at the end.
I'm not counting on it. though.

 

P.s.: I've always pronounced "Umber" as "Oombah", the way Robb and the Greatjon did in season 1. Was I wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The level of denial is hiiighhh... and I wanted, more than anything, to not be Rickon.

It's pretty obvious they're using him as a trade to get Ramsay on board with getting rid of the wildlings. Once they get what they want they'll give Ramsay what he want: Rickon. And let's be honest, if there's a Stark alive, Ramsay loses the North so the Umbers will make sure he keeps his end of the bargain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Floke said:

For all we know, the whole North except for the Umbers and the Karstarks died at the Red Wedding.

 

It's a real shame then that the only sigil that could be seen at the Red Wedding besides Stark was Manderly.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, The 999th Sword of Braavos said:

maybe the Umbers are playing the role of the manderlys this season. GRRM said manderlys would not be in the show in his post explaining TWOW delay. 

This was my thinking. Also the much mentioned scene leading people to fear for Rickon could be a Davos' head on the walls of White Habour switcheroo.

To anyone who says the show can't have the Umbers backstab Ramsey because the show doesn't work that way are just wrong. The show had Littlefinger betray Ned and Joffrey.
Also the Umbers turning up with a Trojan Horse like gift to play nice and then double-cross Ramsey is hardly the most subtle plot ever.

But then again it could just be D&D going for shock value. They could go down this road quite easily.

Currently I'm leaning towards the Umbers being Manderly stand-ins but am keeping my expectations low enough to not be overly disappointed if D&D do decide to go down the shock route.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Umbers are not a Manderly stand in, because the show has name checked the Manderlys now several times.  This means the Manderlys will show up.  They may be very different from the book version, but they're going to show up one way or the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well there are a few options. Someone mentioned Littlefinger. Why did he go North with Sansa? Why not just deliver her in the Riverlands and head back to his castle. Presumably, he was up there doing something behind the scenes, like convincing the Karstarks to cozy up to Ramsay to dispatch Roose, then getting all the houses with big armies to Winterfell under the auspices of working with Ramsay. 

With enough men close to Ramsay, they can ensure Rickon's safety. Littlefinger WANTS a Stark in Winterfell, because he plans on marrying Sansa. He thinks he can rally the North's forces to claim the Iron Throne. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think its highly possible that the Umbers DO have something up their sleeves and intend to betray Ramsey... BUT I don't think that plan has anything to do with helping the Starks. I think they're purely in it for themselves.

I think they killed Shaggydog (sadly on rewatch the head is much too big to be a normal wolf) and turned Rickon over to Ramsey because they saw an advantage to House Umber in it. Maybe it does get them close enough to stab Ramsey in the back without becoming an oathbreaker, but I don't think there's any contingency to somehow pull Rickon out before things get nasty. I think he's just a pawn that the Umbers don't mind sacrificing to further their own ends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While it would be great for the Umbers to be playing Ramsey, that seems way too optimistic, especially for D&D. What's more likely? 

That they hand over their liege lord to a known psychopath who desperately needs to kill any Starks that could possibly still be living in order to maintain control of the North, all in an attempt to earn his trust when they could have done so by simply pledging their fealty;

OR that D&D are the writers that they've repeatedly shown themselves to be, who don't respect the source material, don't care about changing characters' loyalties from the books, and who are apparently under the impression that the North does NOT remember anything. Having the Northern houses support the Boltons against a son of Ned Stark is pukeworthy, as is Ramsey potentially killing/flaying Rickon for shock value. Because screw interesting plot development when you can melt the interwebs instead.

I hope I'm wrong, but even if the Umbers are conspiring against Ramsey, handing over Rickon would be lunacy.

Now, I've read in a few places that D&D are changing as much of the story as possible so as not to ruin the upcoming books. Whether that's really believable, or just an excuse they use so they can sprinkle their D&D turds all over the story, is up for debate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can honestly see the logic this way....

The show has told us that the Bolton's cannot afford to have the North rally behind a Stark.  The Bolton's have said "with the Umbers, Karstarks, and Manderleys they would have enough men for the rest of the houses.  The Umbers show up knowing that Roose is dead and bring a gift....their gift could have come at any time but right after Roose dies? that's provocative.

I can see Rikkon and Osha playing the role of Mance and the Spearwives.  You need to be within Winterfell for that scheme to pay off.  We won't know until the battle of the bastards and it's likely that the plan fails which cost Rikkon his life.  If they don't at least try, holding on to Rikkon has no value at all.  He would be a hunted man in a Bolton north forever.

With Bran being told he will leave the tree at some point, Rikkon is redundant which is why I think their plan will fail.  I do think the wildlings will be given the lands of castles of the Northern houses that side with the Boltons.

It will be interesting no matter how it plays out.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...