Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, lancerman said:

You should just watch it because there is precisely zero evidence to either claim. She said Rickon was dead the second Ramsay got his hands on him and she was right. Ramsay was never letting Rickon make it out of that battle. And if she wanted Jon dead, she did a shit job of it by having the Vale army save him.

Agreed. People are really pulling insane shit out of their ass. Sansa is not a strategic mastermind, but saying she basically doesnt care about her family is utter bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Came here for the spoilers....so happy to know that Ramsay is dead. Long live GRRM! But a part of me is sad that GOT has lost one of its vilest villains. Felt the same when Jofferry died. Rickon dies but what happens to Shaggydog? Is he really dead as shown in the previous episodes? There were theories that the head presented by Lord Karstark was not of Shaggydog. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure that Sansa is responsible for anyone dying. Just because she requested Littlefinger's help didn't mean that the forces were under her command and doesn't mean that she was making military decisions for them. Isn't it likely possible that even though she was receiving help from the Vale that she probably had no say in how/where/when they'd attack/assist? It was stated a long time ago that Littlefinger's plan for the Vale forces was to let a battle take place and then mop up the victor when they are vulnerable. Maybe the attack would only have worked or worked best when the Bolton's were already out of a formation that would allow them to re-adjust and defend?

Yes, she probably should have told Jon but maybe she didn't get the guarantee of the Vale forces or wasn't sure that they'd actually show up/show up on time? Maybe the Vale forces weren't just waiting in the wings to attack, maybe they were just arriving? or if they were waiting in the wings then maybe it was at the command of Littlefinger/Vale Leadership and not Sansa?

I'm no defender of D&D or bad writing but this is one point that fans are complaining about that I disagree with over because there are plenty of reasons why Sansa could have not wanted to tell Jon and plenty of reasons why Sansa had no control over the timing of the Vale arrival/charge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why Wun Wun went to battle sans weapon.  Simply uprooting a tree, and swinging it around would have pretty much made the Vale rescue unneeded.

 

Also, not sure how laying Rickon to rest in the crypts is going to reveal any new info.  Rickon's not going deep down where any possible secrets may be.  He's going where many have already been.   Why wouldn't any of those people have found it already?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Lord of the Waters said:

Evidently Rickon Stark has never seen Apocalypto...

But he's apparently seen Prometheus.

And as for Sansa, I never got the sense she wanted Jon dead or didn't care about Rickon. She understood completely what they were up against with Ramsey and she was actually right: Ramsey laid out a trap and Jon fell for it. And people grieve in different ways, if Sansa had bawled her eyes out or whatnot I would have thought it was over the top, her subdued reaction to his death worked for me. And I knew Vale ex machina was going to happen, but I was so satisfied when it did...sometimes I don't mind that kind of plot device if it's done properly and imo, it was done properly in this case.

And was anyone else thinking when Jon said to bury Rickon beside our father that 'no Jon...he's not your father.'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, plectrum said:

Hold tight, I just spotted a logical problem.  

Jon says he wants Rickon buried in the crypt "beside my father."  Ned's bones never got to Winterfell that I'm aware of.  

Didn't Tyrion return them after he took over as Hand, or was that only in the books?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Im With Stannis said:

Didn't Tyrion return them after he took over as Hand, or was that only in the books?

Baelish did. There's just very little chance they made it to Winterfell. 

That said its nothing Jon would know about. 

I mean unless there is the off chance Roose took them back to appease northerners. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone explain what was the "alternate approach" that Tyrion suggested? Because Dany talked about killing the maesters, burning their ships, killing their soldiers. Tyrion says "no, no, I have a better plan." So they make a meeting with the three men, despite it's 100% clear from the start that no party would surrender. Then Dany rides Drogon. Grey Worm kills two of the men ("kill the measters"), Dany burns the ships ("burning the ships") and Daario leads the Dothraki at sons of the Harpy ("killing their soldiers"). What exactly about this is the "alternate approach"???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RedViperHD said:

I'm no defender of D&D or bad writing but this is one point that fans are complaining about that I disagree with over because there are plenty of reasons why Sansa could have not wanted to tell Jon and plenty of reasons why Sansa had no control over the timing of the Vale arrival/charge.

If she had no control / knowledge about the timing of Vale arrival, what she did is just plainly stupid. She puts Jon whole army at risk of being killed before Vale forces arrival hiding him that those reinforcements could be expected.

It's only if she was sure about the timing that hiding this information was defendable : sure that Vale forces were going to save the day but unsure Jon's would have accepted to play the bait, she may have had good reasons to hide the information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no love for Sansa book or show, but any insinuation that she is "working against" any of her brothers, half or otherwise, is just crap. IMO.    

I hope that at the end of the day D&D will stop making Jon so dumb.  I don't mind them elevating Sansa as a "player" but part of the Jon Snow character is that he is wise beyond his years.  I understand that they needed him to be a little lost after being resurrected but I want him back in commander mode now.  Doubty time is over.  

I also hope that (on the show and in the books) Robb did in fact legitimize Jon and that Jon will be Lord of Winterfell.  Even if he eventually goes on to be something else and turns it over to Sansa, I do want to see his dream of sitting in Ned's place fulfilled.  

Someone commented above the Ned is not Jon's father.  Maybe not biologically, but in every meaningful way Jon is Ned's son and a Stark through and through.      

I also fear that the Onion Knight is about to give the Red Woman a red smile.  Sir Davos loved Shireen, even if Jon tries to intervene to save Melissandre, I think she may be doomed.  I like the Red Witch.  I feel like she is ultimately is "good' and has Jon's back.  But the burning of Shireen cannot go unpunished.    

I think that in the books it will be Queen Selyse who burns Shireen in desperation, not Stannis or Mellisandre.  She is the mindless zealot, IMO.

  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Philpenn said:

Not sure why Wun Wun went to battle sans weapon.  Simply uprooting a tree, and swinging it around would have pretty much made the Vale rescue unneeded.

 

Also, not sure how laying Rickon to rest in the crypts is going to reveal any new info.  Rickon's not going deep down where any possible secrets may be.  He's going where many have already been.   Why wouldn't any of those people have found it already?

Robb Starks "will" granting full titles and the stark name to Jon. 

On a different note, if Jon is legitimized, then LF marrying Sansa doesn't make him Warden of the North. Something to keep an eye on in terms of LF trying to create a rift between Sansa and Jon to get him out of the picture. 

Edited by Stannis Lives

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Nerevanin said:

Can someone explain what was the "alternate approach" that Tyrion suggested? Because Dany talked about killing the maesters, burning their ships, killing their soldiers. Tyrion says "no, no, I have a better plan." So they make a meeting with the three men, despite it's 100% clear from the start that no party would surrender. Then Dany rides Drogon. Grey Worm kills two of the men ("kill the measters"), Dany burns the ships ("burning the ships") and Daario leads the Dothraki at sons of the Harpy ("killing their soldiers"). What exactly about this is the "alternate approach"???

She said she would return the cities to the ashes, meaning total destruction of them(hence Tyrion bringing up the Mad King and wildfire). That would have caused thousands of innocent people to die. This only caused those who were killing to die, the soldiers, ships, and masters. So this is a very different plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Stannis Lives said:

Robb Starks will granting full titles and the stark name to Jon. 

Show hasn't ever brought that up before have they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Philpenn said:

Show hasn't ever brought that up before have they?

Right before the red wedding I thought Robb tells his banner men to hold the will handing the North to Jon if something happens to him. Maybe that only happens in the books?  I didn't think so 

if they are going to do the ToJ reveal in episode 10, then it's really a moot point anyway. Although technically, if R+L is true, then Jon is the rightful heir to the Iron Throne AND to winter fell. If there is no will in the show, then I guess it goes to Bran, once he makes his appearance. 

Edited by Stannis Lives

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Nerevanin said:

Can someone explain what was the "alternate approach" that Tyrion suggested? Because Dany talked about killing the maesters, burning their ships, killing their soldiers. Tyrion says "no, no, I have a better plan." So they make a meeting with the three men, despite it's 100% clear from the start that no party would surrender. Then Dany rides Drogon. Grey Worm kills two of the men ("kill the measters"), Dany burns the ships ("burning the ships") and Daario leads the Dothraki at sons of the Harpy ("killing their soldiers"). What exactly about this is the "alternate approach"???

Dany said she was going to kill all the Masters, not just the 3 that were in Meereen, and not just their fleet, all of them as in Volantis, Qarth, Yunkai etc... She was going to destroy all their cities. Tyrion talked her down. There was little blood shed for a battle. Dany destroyed 1 ship, Greyworm talked the guard into leaving without any of them being harmed and 2 Masters were killed after they attempted to sacrifice the third.

They made an example of those guys. They broke a pact, attacked Meereen and got off lucky. The third master was released to spread the word. It wasn't really a battle, it was a quick minor engagement to make a point. Point being don't push your luck. You say no party surrendered but the Masters did surrender. It only took one ship and 2 masters. Look how many died in Jon's battle and Dany and the Masters had much larger forces.

It's similar to what Aegon used to do, offer surrender, if it's not excepted make an example. They could of killed 10's of thousands of people, a Handful of Harpies who are the ones attacking, a couple of Masters who broke a pact and 1 ship out what is suppose to be hundreds. Dany was planning on removing all of them from the face of the earth. Leveling entire cities, the death toll could of been in the hundreds of thousands.

In most wars you don't end up with a peace that quick and so little loss of life. It was a good plan, simple and effective, now a lot of people are not going to die, I mean a lot. That's why in the conversation between Tyrion and Dany he brought up her father wanting to burn cities. Because Dany was going to totally wreck them, no more masters, no more cities, countless dead. Instead it was a ship attacking a city, Harpies attacking innocent unarmed people, and 2 Masters. There are thousands of masters, and they have armies, and servants, and sell swords, and cities full of people. Hell I think Jon killed more people by himself than died in the battle for Meereen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×