Daenerys Demurred

[Makk]

7 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That is a subtle piece of foreshadowing not a red herring. There are actually no red herrings in this story, especially not in the prophecy and vision relaying department. And this is the description of a dream by the dreamer, not something she is drawing any prophetic (false) conclusions from. It is just the dream, and we, the readers, are supposed to connect the dots and make the connection to the Others. Daenerys herself can't do that yet.

We only get mistakes when dreams or visions or prophecies are interpreted by other people. Cersei's memory of Maggy's prophecy are accurate. The problems creep in with the interpretation.

Dany sees herself as Rhaegar here. This has nothing to do with Jon. She is Rhaegar. And unlike Rhaegar she will be victorious at her Trident in a fight against the Others. Rhaegar once believed he was the promised prince but he wasn't. Dany is.

If it does allude to her using dragons to fight the Others, as I believe you think it does, it is not subtle. Not in the slightest. And wherever there is a prophecy so blunt I think you should be careful. I am not denying that the dream is prophetic and has a meaning, I'm just very cautious about the interpretation.

Also pay attention to her emotion at the end. The readers here know about the others, Dany does not. She sees them as the usurpers forces. And she is elated that she has incinerated them all.

You may well be right here. As I said, in hints very, very strongly in that direction. But equally these things can be deliberately misleading, hence the red herring.

 

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Makk said:

If it does allude to her using dragons to fight the Others, as I believe you think it does, it is not subtle. Not in the slightest. And wherever there is a prophecy so blunt I think you should be careful. I am not denying that the dream is prophetic and has a meaning, I'm just very cautious about the interpretation.

You can be cautious, of course. But this is subtle enough a hint for quite a few people even here to miss it. Or forget it afterwards. When I say something is 'subtle' I don't need by ASoIaF nerds standards, but by the standards of a casual reader. When we first read those books we caught some things but most of the subtler things we missed.

And again, this isn't a prophecy. It is the description of a dream which may be prophetic or give a convoluted picture of the future.

2 hours ago, Makk said:

Also pay attention to her emotion at the end. The readers here know about the others, Dany does not. She sees them as the usurpers forces. And she is elated that she has incinerated them all.

Yes, because she defeated the enemy. There is nothing wrong with that. Whoever takes the field against Daenerys has to 

2 hours ago, Makk said:

You may well be right here. As I said, in hints very, very strongly in that direction. But equally these things can be deliberately misleading, hence the red herring.

Can you point out any prophecies and prophetic dreams that were deliberately misleading? George gives us a lot of hints in those books as to what's going to happen later but he doesn't give us red herrings. Stannis is identified as a fake and false savior from the start, just as his 'magic sword' is. We are never led to believe by the voice of the author that Cersei or Tyrion truly killed Jon Arryn, etc. We get claims and with those claims subtle clues what's truly going on.

There are some visions referring to things that never came true - like a grown-up Rhaego - but those are clearly marked as such. All the other prophecies, visions, and dreams I remember off the top of my head seem to refer to things that will come true or already came true.

[Makk]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

You can be cautious, of course. But this is subtle enough a hint for quite a few people even here to miss it. Or forget it afterwards. When I say something is 'subtle' I don't need by ASoIaF nerds standards, but by the standards of a casual reader. When we first read those books we caught some things but most of the subtler things we missed.

And again, this isn't a prophecy. It is the description of a dream which may be prophetic or give a convoluted picture of the future.

I don't think this was subtle at all. On my very first read (and I read the first 3 books all at once in about 15 days) I immediately thought Dany was going to use a dragon to fight the others. There were only one or two other prophetic aspects which are as clear. I didn't really understand what much of what other prophecy was alluding to (and I still don't) but that one stuck out.

 

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Can you point out any prophecies and prophetic dreams that were deliberately misleading? George gives us a lot of hints in those books as to what's going to happen later but he doesn't give us red herrings. Stannis is identified as a fake and false savior from the start, just as his 'magic sword' is. We are never led to believe by the voice of the author that Cersei or Tyrion truly killed Jon Arryn, etc. We get claims and with those claims subtle clues what's truly going on.

There are some visions referring to things that never came true - like a grown-up Rhaego - but those are clearly marked as such. All the other prophecies, visions, and dreams I remember off the top of my head seem to refer to things that will come true or already came true.

I don't think GRRM intends his prophecy is to be understood easily. He even said in real life...

Quote

Prophecy is like a treacherous woman. She takes your member in her mouth, and you moan with the pleasure of it and think, how sweet, how fine, how good this is... and then her teeth snap shut and your moans turn to screams... Prophecy will bite your prick off everytime

 

Obviously a large amount of the prophecy has yet to eventuate. But I will give some examples where the most obvious conclusion is wrong.

Quote

He saw his father pleading with the king, his face etched with grief. He saw Sansa crying herself to sleep at night, and he saw Arya watching in silence and holding her secrets hard in her heart. There were shadows all around them. One shadow was as dark as ash, with the terrible face of a hound. Another was armoured like the sun, golden and beautiful. Over them both loomed a giant in armour made of stone, but when he opened his visor, there was nothing inside but darkness and thick black blood.

Here the hound is portrayed as an enemy but actually helps both Sansa and Arya.

Quote

I dreamed of the man who came today, the one they call Reek. You and your brother lay dead at his feet, and he was skinning off your faces with a long red blade.

They were the Miller's boys rather than Bran and Rickon.

Quote

I have seen your sister in my fires, fleeing from this marriage they have made for her. Coming here, to you. A girl in grey on a dying horse, I have seen it plain as day. It has not happened yet, but it will.

And here George in no uncertain terms shows us how misleading prophecy can be. The reader thinks the trick alludes to Jeyne rather than Arya, yet that is a red herring and it actually alludes to Alys Karstark (although some readers think it means something else).

There will be other red herrings in some of the prophecy to come. The younger and more beautiful queen almost certainly contains a red herring. It now strikes me as somewhat dubious that GRRM would reveal the main plot (although I acknowledge there is a huge number of other plots that can still interact with it) at such an early stage in such a blunt manner. But I don't trust that vision at all, I now think it is far too obvious.

[Lord Varys]

11 minutes ago, Makk said:

I don't think this was subtle at all. On my very first read (and I read the first 3 books all at once in about 15 days) I immediately thought Dany was going to use a dragon to fight the others. There were only one or two other prophetic aspects which are as clear. I didn't really understand what much of what other prophecy was alluding to (and I still don't) but that one stuck out.

But did you conclude that on the basis of prophecy or simply by realizing that this would be the obvious way to unite the Dany plot with the Westeros plot? You can come to that conclusion as early as the last chapter of AGoT.

11 minutes ago, Makk said:

I don't think GRRM intends his prophecy is to be understood easily. He even said in real life...

That is true when you presume to decipher prophecy and/or use it as a guideline for your (political) decisions or even try to make it come true (like Melisandre does). That isn't going to work. But that doesn't mean the reader cannot figure out what certain prophecies mean or certain visions refer to. The cloth dragon on a pole in front of a cheering crowd is most likely Aegon, just as the blued-eyed king without a shadow most certainly is Stannis. And the blue flower on the ice wall Jon Snow, etc.

11 minutes ago, Makk said:

Obviously a large amount of the prophecy has yet to eventuate. But I will give some examples where the most obvious conclusion is wrong.

Here the hound is portrayed as an enemy but actually helps both Sansa and Arya.

I'd say that is already too much interpretation. A shadow looming over them could also refer to him becoming an important power in their lives they can't control. Jaime is also one of the shadows and he is actually never the enemy of either Sansa nor Arya but still sort of a power in their lives since he has sent Brienne to find them.

But this isn't really a prophecy or a vision of the future, it is a visionary mosaic of the present.

11 minutes ago, Makk said:

They were the Miller's boys rather than Bran and Rickon.

True, but the vision might still have shown those miller's boys and Jojen may only have mistaken them for Bran and Rickon because of the clothes they were wearing. After all, Ramsay was skinning off their faces...

11 minutes ago, Makk said:

And here George in no uncertain terms shows us how misleading prophecy can be. The reader thinks the trick alludes to Jeyne rather than Arya, yet that is a red herring and it actually alludes to Alys Karstark (although some readers think it means something else).

Here the vision Mel saw in the flames most likely showed Alys Karstark from the start. She just mistook her for Arya (whom she never saw) and the reader than thought the girl would have to be Jeyne Poole - if Melisandre was right in her assessment. But this isn't really a red herring because the author never tries to make the whole thing a mystery - we don't think about a lot who the girl on the dying horse might be - nor does he make an effort to convince the reader that Arya or Jeyne are meant here. He just gives us some characters drawing a certain conclusion on the basis of evidence we as reader never see. If we had been in Mel's head when she had the vision and had gotten a more detailed description of the girl we would have most likely realized pretty quickly that she was neither Arya nor Jeyne.

11 minutes ago, Makk said:

There will be other red herrings in some of the prophecy to come. The younger and more beautiful queen almost certainly contains a red herring. It now strikes me as somewhat dubious that GRRM would reveal the main plot (although I acknowledge there is a huge number of other plots that can still interact with it) at such an early stage in such a blunt manner. But I don't trust that vision at all, I now think it is far too obvious.

Oh, I'm not that happy with either the younger, more beautiful queen nor the valonqar prophecy but there is a lot of room for surprises there. Very few people think Jaime is going to be the valonqar (only people remembering that Cersei is Tywin's eldest child will consider him a possibility) and for the younger, more beautiful queen there are a number of suspects - Margaery (very unlikely), Sansa, Daenerys, and ... Arianne Martell. But very few people usually think about the latter. I consider it very likely that Arianne is going to be the younger, more beautiful queen. The Martells are very likely to get their revenge, and if Arianne marries Aegon she will take everything that Cersei holds dear. She may even play a considerable role in the deaths of her children. She is already responsible for Myrcella's disfigurement.

[dregs4NED]

18 hours ago, SeanF said:

I don't think that Daenerys would launch an all-out purge against every family whose head had fought against her father, but I do think that she would punish any of the surviving leaders of the rebellion, and would burn Jaime alive if he fell into her hands.

I agree, I don't think she will go on an all-out purge. But I do wonder what will come of her motive for vengeance, as there are outlets available should she look for them. I also think that there are crossroads out there that can make Daenerys question her quest for vengeance to its core, such as coming to the revelation of learning that her father was mad and deserved his end. 

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

There are quite a few ex machinas in that story, so there is no problem with that. And this isn't even problematic since Marwyn is already on his way to Dany, and we do know she will meet him (since George has actually revealed to have written chapters he later changed where Marwyn already arrived in Meereen).

What ex machinas have already occured? Marywn is not an ex machina. Daenerys has been warned that people from all over will come to seek her dragons.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The sparrows did imprison Margaery, and the High Septon is the leader of the sparrows. The Kingslanders complained about that.

My point still stands that can still be joy and relief from the sparrows following her potential releae.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It is not. Her arc is about the things she saw and heard in the House of the Undying. She is at the center of all that. The Song of Ice and Fire is her song. She is the promised princess. She is the one who is going to drink from the cup of ice, and the cup of fire, whatever that means. The Others are a huge part of the ice in that story, and Dany is the human embodying fire the closest. She will fight against the Others.

The cups of ice and fire can merely be allegory, of say suffering and passion, polar extremes of humanity, akin to the oaths given to Bran by the Reeds.

Where does your certainty come from that Daenerys is the promised princess? The visions in the House of the Undying don't have any references to the Others. You have Stannis Baratheon and Jon Snow (in relation to the Wall and the Others) in two visions of the 15 she had, and that's it. Where do you extrapolate your idea from?

Her arc is about from trending weakness to strength. From being a slave to being free. From being a victim to being a conqueror. From helplessly watching suffering about her to doling out her brand of justice. From what it means to be virtuous to what it means to be a good ruler. And soon (I personally believe), what it means to be following someone else's footsteps (ie Viserys and previous Targaryens in Westeros), to finding her own path.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

But it can. It can be cut short by death and false choices. That is a huge point in this story. Ned and Robb could both have played huge parts in the fight against the Others. That was their destiny, but they threw it away by riding down south. Ned heard Bloodraven's voice/the old gods repeatedly, creating this sense of foreboding in him, the feeling that he shouldn't leave Winterfell, that he shouldn't stay at KL. But he didn't listen, and so he died.

You can't just say so-and-so character's destiny was to fight the Others, but blew it due to certain decisions. Because then it wouldn't be destiny. That's like saying I was destined to win the lottery, but I chose to buy a cup of coffee instead. Then obviously, winning the lotto wasn't my destiny. At least I knew I had chances of winning the lottery, but Robb and Ned didn't know squat about what's coming for Westeros.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

No, because the whole point of Daenerys' story is to learn that she is not about vengeance, that vengeance is pretty much irrelevant. We learn that in AGoT when Robert and Ned are killed by other guys, and continue to learn it when Tywin dies in ASoS, not being killed by Dany, or a Stark, or Doran Martell, or anybody he truly wronged but by his own son.

Yes! I agree! But it still remains a core, driving motive to head to Westeros. Nothing has diminished this drive, despite the deaths of key players in her father's dethroning.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Dany isn't about vengeance. She is about the story of vengeance and whether it makes sense that the children have to repeat the sins of the parents - they don't.

This is a confusing statement. I understand the latter, but not in relation to the former; they contradict each other. Dany literally says, "I mean to sail to Westeros, and drink the wine of vengeance from the skull of the Usurper."

Let me correct you: A core element in Dany's quest has been about revenge, how she has carried vengeance in her heart for multiple books. But she may find down the line that revenge is a repetition of sins, such as the Blackwoods and Brackens feuding for generations, and that she can drop vengeance from her heart if she learns to let go.

But the big question here is, how will she let go? Under what circumstances? I think it's a really enticing thought. Like, in one possible scenario, she must kill Tommen to, not just in an attempt to fulfill her vengeance, but to properly "dethrone" a king. Will she stop herself? Or regret the decision afterward? Will she embrace vengeance? Or will she question her whole mission?

Or will she refuse? And regret that?

Of course, Tommen may be dead when she arrives, but I'm just creating a scenario that will challenge Dany's quest for revenge.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

But unlike, say, Arya - who actually suffered a lot of abuse and witnessed countless crimes against her family - Dany has not seen or experienced any such things. She doesn't lay abed at night reciting the names of the people she wants to kill like the psychopath Arya has become.

Here's the difference between Arya and Daenerys: Arya's revenge is based on first-hand accounts, watching the death of her family, while Daenerys is based on second-hand accounts, from the bias of her brother about a family she never knew.

Arya is absolute in her vengeance, 100% committed. Daenerys, however, has room in her heart for doubt, and while committed, she is not 100% certain, and has shown a sliver of doubt before. But that doesn't negate her drive for vengeance, it just leaves it open for change down the line.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Once Dany is in the Red Keep she won't have any doubts at all. She might still not want to kill people but she will do what it takes to save her kingdom and the world.

I think I can respectively agree to disagree here, and this shows the split between our point of views. I honestly think that gazing upon the ruins of the Dragonpit is going to inflict major doubt, and sitting on the cold, monstrous piece of metal (that hasn't really been described to her yet) will reflect the darker path that she has taken. That, and her the revelation about her father, and the shithole that King's Landing really is -- all of these mounts to Dany's doubts.

But I yield in the possibility that Dany can simply say to herself "If I look back, I am lost" and absolve herself of the possibility that she is making a mistake, and presses on. Honestly, I'm excited to find out what will happen despite my stance 

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The Dothraki Sea is dying in Dany's last chapter. And winter is, of course, a thing in Essos, George has commented on that. It is usually not as worse there as in Westeros but that's because the northern coast of Essos is about as far north as the Vale. And the southern coast even farther south than Dorne (where it snows 'almost never').

But you even get hints of winter setting in in Essos in ADwD. The lagoon of Braavos is freezing shut, for instance. And it has gotten pretty cold there in Arya's most recent chapter.

The idea that the Dothraki have no idea how to deal with winter is just wrong. They suffer through winter like anybody else, although it is not that unlikely that many khalasars hang out in the southern parts of the Dothraki Sea in winter.

I'll admit when I'm wrong. Apparently, Essos does experience some cold during wintertime. But the Others are bringing the coldest of colds. And a Northern winter is likely to press further down south than ever before.

Although, I'm having trouble finding the quote about the lagoon of Braavos being frozen. Can you help me out?

I know that the horselords are.. well, lords of horses. But I will be surprised if they equip their horses' hooves to deal with the winter snow like the Northern houses of Westeros did with their march to Winterfell. For there aren't any passages of the Dothraki Sea being draped in snow, just dying grass. 

A large chunk of Stannis' army are right next to these northerners as they adapt to the snow, but they themselves still don't adapt. I doubt that the Dothraki have ever seen a winter that is coming south from beyond the Wall, and they may find difficulty in adapting.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Come on, people all over the place will talk about winter now that it has begun. This isn't even a question. You cannot honestly think Dany will stage an invasion without even thinking about the fact that it is winter now and how winter is going to influence her campaign. That's something the show would do but not those books.

I think that Daenerys is being set up for scenario where she leaps before she looks. I don't think any Essosi can imagine what kind of winter is preceding the Others' invasion. They might say "bring some extra blankets and provisions", but they will be marching into a frozen hell. I don't know how much one can really prepare for that. It requires ample anticipation, extreme preparation and radical adaptations. Who amongst Dany's retinue is trained for winter warfare, like a northerner would be in Westeros?

I think Daenerys might receive a warning, saying "conquering Westeros is futile now that winter has come. You best turn around." But that won't stop her, let alone help her grasp the perils ahead.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

But even if that didn't work - all she needs to subdue Westeros is to have enough food for her own troops. And she is going to get at least that. Because invading a country that's already starving and expecting to live off this land would be suicide, plain and simple.

But what about her new subjects? Those that are hungry? Will Daenerys say "none for you?" How will she maintain order in her city without meeting their greatest demand? 

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

She can send all the Dothraki khalasars against the Free Cities. We don't have to be with her when she does that. And those men won't know what hit them - at least at Norvos and Qohor, and perhaps even at Volantis - because they won't know that the Dothraki have been united under a single ruler. They will think they can still bribe them with gifts and trinkets, but that's not going to work this time.

I don't think it's going to a walk-inside invasion for the Dothraki against all of the Free Cities. A siege still takes a lot of time. Volantis is already gearing for war, and others may follow suit. "Not knowing what will hit them" won't happen, as Daenerys is hitting Meereen first, and news will spread. If she decides to somehow hit everywhere at once instead of just Meereen, then she's missing out on giving the explicit command on getting food for Westeros.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

No, Dany was in need of food because she had a ragged army of freedmen following her. Not every army besieging a city or castle has insufficient provisions. There might be a problem if all of Dany's people were following her to Westeros, but I doubt that will be the case.

So she's going to leave all these freedmen behind? What if they want to follow her to the ends of the earth? Isn't she getting more men in the khalasar than she would with leaving freedman behind?  What about those who she seeks to rule when she gets over to Westeros?

Jaime's siege on Riverrun was in dire need of food. Yes, the Brotherhood without Banners contributed to this, but it was mainly the Blackfish anticipating a siege, as did the masters of Meereen. What's to prevent a defender making these common preparations for a potential sieges?

I bet you'll say that Daenerys will just ride in on her dragons to each city while her divided army conquers the entire continent. The timescale doesn't allow this, though. The only places the khalasar should attack in this scenario are Volantis, Myr, and Pentos, all following the turned Iron Fleet.

This is the ideal route for Daenerys in any scenario. The question remains, though, is how many mouths is she going to bring and what are her hopes in acquiring food without starving the cities that she's taking it from.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Jaehaerys I and Aegon III were dragons, too, you know, and they fed their people as good they could. 

But they are not Daenerys. And it's Dany's theme, not the theme of House Targaryen.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The food crisis from ACoK is resolved. The Tyrells no longer block the Roseroad, and Stannis no longer controls Blackwater Bay.

WHAT?! That quote about food prices being "shockingly high" is from aSoS. It is critical that you understand that the food crisis is only being mitigated by the Tyrells and is far from being resolved.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Because if you don't then the entire population is going to turn into wights and overwhelm the few people that are 'save and sound' hiding behind castle walls? You cannot hide from or sit out that enemy.

No, but you can take a defensive position against a superior force. Duh. Especially when the enemy is uninhabited in a terrain that is hellish for your own army.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The picture you are painting there is a caricature. Daenerys doesn't think like that. Hell, even Arya doesn't. She is not as of yet fallen so low as to kill the children or distant kin or simply *somebody* for the things that happened to her and her family (although killing men like the insurance guy, Dareon, and the Bolton guard strongly indicates that you can be killed by Arya Stark for minor offenses or pretty much no reason at all). And nothing indicates Dany will ever go down that route.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

No, she hasn't. That's the caricature again. I'd be interested to see where in the books you see an 'unchecked unquenchable thirst for vengeance' in Daenerys?

I think someone who crucifies 163 people without hearing their stories and without trial, whether or not they were complicit in their alleged crimes, shows how far Daenerys will go. And when it comes to exact justice on those who killed her family, how far will she go there?

I've mentioned this before, but I'll go ahead and iterate: Dany wants revenge on a broad group of people, "The Usurpers dogs." And despite the key players of this group being killed off, Dany's quest for vengeance has not wavered the slightest bit. At what point will it dissipate? When will she think, "Okay, I think justice has been served"? Her quest for revenge is an abstraction that cannot be filled, and the deaths of Robert, of Eddard (and soon, of Tywin), proves this.

Daenerys herself has painted a caricature of the foes that are responsible for the fall of House Targaryen. Through what method can this be dispelled?

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Oh, come on, that doesn't make any sense. She doesn't see everybody as a potential enemy. And no, Tyrion also doesn't want to kill all the Lannisters. Tyrion even shies away from his plan to crown Myrcella once he figures out that this means to kill her. He does not want to kill his niece, you know.

What does Cersei have to offer? Giving Dany the Lannister men that sacked King's Landing?

It will be interesting to see how Tyrion will act if he is on Dany's team and has to take down Tommen, for if Tommen remains alive, he will be a symbol of the previous dynasty. So, who knows, really.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Dany sees herself as Rhaegar here. This has nothing to do with Jon. She is Rhaegar. And unlike Rhaegar she will be victorious at her Trident in a fight against the Others. Rhaegar once believed he was the promised prince but he wasn't. Dany is.

But there is nothing about the Others in this passage. She is Rhaegar killing Robert, imagining that he is ice and that she is fire. This is more than a stretch; you are filling in what you want to see here.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Nope, you are trying to dismiss a crucial bit of information here. Daenerys does have genuine prophetic dreams earlier in the story, most notably her first dragon dream involving Drogon. She doesn't think that was a prophetic dream either but it turned out that it was.

There's nothing to dismiss. Nothing is there. You said that other guy covered the prophetic dream you were referring to, but now there is another prophetic dream? Does that one refer to the Others? Because the one on the Trident does not. The others don't even wear ice as armor. Good golly, man. You might as well say that Robert Baratheon was an Other in disguise.

15 hours ago, The Fattest Leech said:

 

@dregs4NED Linda, one of the authors of the world book, one of the consults to George for his ASOIAF books

Unless she has inside information on the plot in future books, I take Linda's opinion on story development with a heavy grain of salt, as I hear she has a history of close-mindedness.

14 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The Dothraki may be difficult to keep in line - which is most likely a reason why she is going to take only a fraction of them to Westeros. The majority will remain in Essos.

Dany's mercenaries will also be difficult to keep in line. So will Victarion's forces, should she keep them. And you say this in response to them wanting all the wealth in Essos.

Here's the thing: they want all the wealth in Westeros, too. And the capital is the place that is most bankrupt and devoid of treasures. That's what's going to cause a majority of Dany's army to be rife with consternation. Then, regardless of whatever fraction or portion Daenerys decides to bring with her to Westeros, you will see dissension within her own retinue.  

And now we expect them to fall in line and do battle against the Others? What's to stop them from just taking up a ship and peacing out?

[SeanF]

19 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Not necessarily. It means to kill the ruling class and perhaps the upper middle class, if such a thing exist. Note that five slaves come on every free man in Volantis. That means she has only to kill a fraction of the population, and that only if we say she goes through with my meticulously planned approach. This is a medieval setting, we won't see her being able to kill every slaver there is. And we also won't know whether slavery returns fifty years from now. But what we'll see, I think, is her making it very clear that it is not going to return when she leaves nor during her own lifetime.

And we should also consider the possibilities of uprisings and revolutions. Dany is not likely going to have to take Volantis. The slaves will rebel and slaughter their masters once they learn that the tiger soldiers have joined her and that they are coming.

And a similar thing might happen in the Three Daughters, although the ratio there is only one free man to three slaves. Considering that the rulers there have no slave soldiers (like the Volantenes) but work mostly with sellswords and sellsails it is likely that they will be able to crush such revolts, resulting in them being eventually put down by Dany's armada.

We don't need Linda to tell us that she is going to go down a darker path. Teaming up with the Dothraki and dealing with the slavers as Daario suggested she should constitutes a darker path in comparison to the nice girl approach she took in ADwD. But this doesn't mean she is going down a path of destruction or that she will have to use the same means she is going to use to crush slavery in Essos when she finally gets to Westeros.

She is not likely to show a lot of mercy to her enemies - but she first has to acquire some real enemies in Westeros. And then those enemies actually have to provoke, oppose, or attack her.

The Dothraki may be difficult to keep in line - which is most likely a reason why she is going to take only a fraction of them to Westeros. The majority will remain in Essos. But should things get dire for her in Westeros she is likely to call on their assistance. But, sure, people die in war. And if she will have to wage a war to take the Iron Throne people will die.

The slaves follower R'hllor have their own fairy-tale narrative written around the reborn Azor Ahai. They expect to be reborn in glory if they die in her service and they most likely expect her to create some sort of better world/mortal paradise in their lands, not this Westeros place. I doubt many of them are likely to go to Westeros for spoils and plunder. If they go it will be because Dany exploits their willingness to die for her. And that will mean that they are an ideal army in the fight against the Others. Only people who do not fear death/are very certain they are fighting for a just and righteous cause are likely to have the stamina to fight against the wights and Others.

The average Westerosi levy is not prepared to face such dreadful enemies. That is part of the reason why Melisandre, Thoros, and Benerro/Moqorro will play crucial rules in the fight against the Others. Fire mages come in handy when people are freezing to death while fighting ice demons.

They will need fanatics to deal with the Others. Normal people won't be able to deal with them.

Focusing on Western Essos for the time being, one sixth, or one quarter, of the population is still a lot of people to wipe out.  And, they'll fight to the bitter end if the only alternative available to them is genocide.

In practice, I imagine there'll be a mix of cities that come to terms with Daenerys, and cities that get wiped out.

Even for the slaves and lower classes. I expect they'll only be exchanging one set of brutal masters for another.  Labouring for Dothraki overlords probably won't be much different from labouring for the slave owners of the Free Cities.

.

 

[Lord Varys]

3 hours ago, SeanF said:

Focusing on Western Essos for the time being, one sixth, or one quarter, of the population is still a lot of people to wipe out.  And, they'll fight to the bitter end if the only alternative available to them is genocide.

The ruling class should be actually limited to the cities proper. It certainly will mean a lot of dead people, but it won't be genocide. It wasn't even genocide in Astapor. Not every man owning a slave would have worn a tokar, no?

3 hours ago, SeanF said:

In practice, I imagine there'll be a mix of cities that come to terms with Daenerys, and cities that get wiped out.

Pentos actually could be one of the cities getting to terms with considering that they no longer practice slavery. And the Tattered Prince most likely wants the city intact, not as a sacked ruin.

3 hours ago, SeanF said:

Even for the slaves and lower classes. I expect they'll only be exchanging one set of brutal masters for another.  Labouring for Dothraki overlords probably won't be much different from labouring for the slave owners of the Free Cities.

I'm not sure the plan is going to be to make the former slaves/poorer classes from the Free Cities chattel of the Dothraki. Dany most likely is going to establish some sort of empire where the cities are granted the right to rule themselves within the boundaries she as queen/empress allows them. Sort of like the Greek city states under the rule of the Macedonian and Hellenistic kings. The idea that some of her captains end up being named satrap or something like that of this or that province is also not unlikely. We won't see her abandoning or giving up the territories she conquered despite the fact that she still doesn't rule them personally.

The Dothraki are not suddenly going to abandon their nomadic lifestyle just because Dany united them. But they might be forced to free their slaves.

[SeanF]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The ruling class should be actually limited to the cities proper. It certainly will mean a lot of dead people, but it won't be genocide. It wasn't even genocide in Astapor. Not every man owning a slave would have worn a tokar, no?

Pentos actually could be one of the cities getting to terms with considering that they no longer practice slavery. And the Tattered Prince most likely wants the city intact, not as a sacked ruin.

I'm not sure the plan is going to be to make the former slaves/poorer classes from the Free Cities chattel of the Dothraki. Dany most likely is going to establish some sort of empire where the cities are granted the right to rule themselves within the boundaries she as queen/empress allows them. Sort of like the Greek city states under the rule of the Macedonian and Hellenistic kings. The idea that some of her captains end up being named satrap or something like that of this or that province is also not unlikely. We won't see her abandoning or giving up the territories she conquered despite the fact that she still doesn't rule them personally.

The Dothraki are not suddenly going to abandon their nomadic lifestyle just because Dany united them. But they might be forced to free their slaves.

Not chattels I imagine, but more like peasants in those parts of the  Roman Empire where barbarian tribes were settled in return for military service;   bound to work on estates and provide taxes and rents for their overlords, as well as for the government.

[Lord Varys]

13 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Not chattels I imagine, but more like peasants in those parts of the  Roman Empire where barbarian tribes were settled in return for military service;   bound to work on estates and provide taxes and rents for their overlords, as well as for the government.

That appears somewhat too sophisticated for me for a Dothraki regime. And Daenerys is not likely to dothrakify all of Essos. But she not going to allow the cities she conquers complete independence like she did with Astapor and Yunkai. That was a mistake. But they could certainly pass on the wealth of the cities to the former slaves and leave an overseer/satrap with a contingent of troops in the city to ensure that the new civil government is not going to change her policies. Sort of similar as the Valyrians allowed the Free Cities to govern themselves in small matters but not in things that mattered to the Freehold.

 

[Sea Dragon]

Daenerys might look like she is going down a dark path, but she is going to be queen of Westeros. That is her goal and her role in the books. 

 

15 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

Unless she has inside information on the plot in future books, I take Linda's opinion on story development with a heavy grain of salt, as I hear she has a history of close-mindedness.

From what I understand Linda does help give the author fact checks and works with the continuity of the story . She and her husband both do. I don't think the controversy around her has anything to do with how she helps work on the books before they go to print. 

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That appears somewhat too sophisticated for me for a Dothraki regime. And Daenerys is not likely to dothrakify all of Essos. But she not going to allow the cities she conquers complete independence like she did with Astapor and Yunkai. That was a mistake. But they could certainly pass on the wealth of the cities to the former slaves and leave an overseer/satrap with a contingent of troops in the city to ensure that the new civil government is not going to change her policies. Sort of similar as the Valyrians allowed the Free Cities to govern themselves in small matters but not in things that mattered to the Freehold.

 

I think Daenerys will take just her bloodriders and a few loyal people with her and most Dothraki will stay in the grasslands. I think Daenerys will pick up followers along the way so it doesn't wipe out food stores and culture as she does. A little from here and there. I think this is where her army will come from. 

[Lord Varys]

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

I agree, I don't think she will go on an all-out purge. But I do wonder what will come of her motive for vengeance, as there are outlets available should she look for them. I also think that there are crossroads out there that can make Daenerys question her quest for vengeance to its core, such as coming to the revelation of learning that her father was mad and deserved his end. 

Aerys' madness doesn't make the murders of Elia, Aegon, and Rhaenys right. And one could even argue that Dany is also not wrong in demanding vengeance and justice for Rhaegar. Dany is not just wanting to avenge her father.

And while Aerys II certainly should have been deposed there is a very good chance that he was clinically insane and thus not really responsible for many of his actions. Declaring he deserves to die more or less the same as claiming the average schizophrenic in a position of power deserves to die, too. And Jaime most definitely deserves to be punished for his crime. On that basically everyone in Westeros agrees. The only thing that saved him was the name and power of his lord father.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

What ex machinas have already occured? Marywn is not an ex machina. Daenerys has been warned that people from all over will come to seek her dragons.

Marwyn isn't seeking a dragon. Marwyn is seeking Daenerys to tell her about the Others.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

The cups of ice and fire can merely be allegory, of say suffering and passion, polar extremes of humanity, akin to the oaths given to Bran by the Reeds.

They could, but they most likely are not. And Dany isn't icy in any metaphorical sense. In addition, when you really go down and check the associations for ice and fire then it is pretty obvious that fire is life and passion, and ice is death and destruction. Vengeance and revenge are ice, too. The North remembers that they have been wrong. Arya remembers the men she intends to murder. The cold preserves, and the ice preserved the Others for thousands of years. And they remember, too. They remember their mission, and they remember why they want to destroy all human life on this planet.

But on the easiest, the most obvious level the fire part are the dragons, and the ice part are the Others.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

Where does your certainty come from that Daenerys is the promised princess? The visions in the House of the Undying don't have any references to the Others. You have Stannis Baratheon and Jon Snow (in relation to the Wall and the Others) in two visions of the 15 she had, and that's it. Where do you extrapolate your idea from?

From all the bits and pieces about the promised prince prophecy we know. Those are

- the fact that the guy is supposed to be (re-)born amidst smoke and salt (Dany was born on the place of salt and smoke - Dragonstone - and reborn in the smoky and salty pyre of Khal Drogo).

- the fact that the promised prince is supposed to wake dragons from stone (which Daenerys did in AGoT).

- the fact that the bleeding star (a red comet) is going to herald the guy's coming (the red comet we see in ACoK first shows up above Drogo's pyre in the last chapter of AGoT)

Even Lightbringer could just be symbolic talk for the dragons. We only know the mythical Azor Ahai had a burning magical sword but nobody ever said that the promised prince has to have such a sword. But the Azor Ahai forging his sword and sacrificing his wife to get is very much mirrored by Dany acquiring her dragons.

If you ignore all that you are in the same camp as the people who doubt that Joffrey was killed by the Tyrells with a Strangler in the wine or that Joffrey being behind the attempt on Bran is some red herring. This doesn't mean that there is no twist coming

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

Her arc is about from trending weakness to strength. From being a slave to being free. From being a victim to being a conqueror. From helplessly watching suffering about her to doling out her brand of justice. From what it means to be virtuous to what it means to be a good ruler. And soon (I personally believe), what it means to be following someone else's footsteps (ie Viserys and previous Targaryens in Westeros), to finding her own path.

That is part of her arc. If she is the promised princess - which I think she is - then she has more to her story than just that. She is surrounded by prophecy and specialness that it is very unlikely she will ever do anything as mundane as only ruling and conquering. 

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

You can't just say so-and-so character's destiny was to fight the Others, but blew it due to certain decisions. Because then it wouldn't be destiny. That's like saying I was destined to win the lottery, but I chose to buy a cup of coffee instead. Then obviously, winning the lotto wasn't my destiny. At least I knew I had chances of winning the lottery, but Robb and Ned didn't know squat about what's coming for Westeros.

There is no destiny in this series in this strict sense. There are prophecies and visions that come true, but there is no grand plan, nor divine hand guiding things. And in that sense you can decide to reject your destiny. You may not be able to prevent prophecies from becoming true but some prophecy coming true doesn't mean it was your destiny that you did the prophesied thing.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

Yes! I agree! But it still remains a core, driving motive to head to Westeros. Nothing has diminished this drive, despite the deaths of key players in her father's dethroning.

She learns that Robert is dead. But this doesn't mean she transfers her hatred of Robert to Tommen or Joffrey. And the same goes for Ned-Robb, Bran, etc., or Jon Arryn/Hoster Tully and their children. She never even mentioned Tyrion, Cersei, Edmure, etc. in the story. The idea that she wants those people dead is about as likely as the claim that Arya wanting to murder Queen Cersei also means she wants to kill King Tommen or Daven Lannister, etc.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

This is a confusing statement. I understand the latter, but not in relation to the former; they contradict each other. Dany literally says, "I mean to sail to Westeros, and drink the wine of vengeance from the skull of the Usurper."

And you actually interpret this literally?

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

Let me correct you: A core element in Dany's quest has been about revenge, how she has carried vengeance in her heart for multiple books. But she may find down the line that revenge is a repetition of sins, such as the Blackwoods and Brackens feuding for generations, and that she can drop vengeance from her heart if she learns to let go.

Dany has nothing to do with the ridiculous Bracken-Blackwood feud. The Baratheons and Targaryens were friends and kin for a very long time. They had a bad time with Robert and Aerys II but that doesn't have to remain this way. Quite a few people think that Dany might pick up Edric Storm at Lys on way to Westeros, legitimizing him and restoring a Baratheon to Storm's End. Stannis and Shireen are not likely to survive the series, and Dany won't allow Aegon's people to keep the castle.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

But the big question here is, how will she let go? Under what circumstances? I think it's a really enticing thought. Like, in one possible scenario, she must kill Tommen to, not just in an attempt to fulfill her vengeance, but to properly "dethrone" a king. Will she stop herself? Or regret the decision afterward? Will she embrace vengeance? Or will she question her whole mission?

Or will she refuse? And regret that?

Of course, Tommen may be dead when she arrives, but I'm just creating a scenario that will challenge Dany's quest for revenge.

I would even doubt that Tommen has to be killed to be dethroned. Jaime intends to reveal the truth about his parentage. The bastards of Jaime and Cersei Lannister are neither royal children nor kings. They are just noble bastards. And we know that even crowned (alleged) royal bastards - like Gaemon Palehair - were dethroned and then not killed. Daenerys Targaryen will have as much reason to fear a 'King Tommen' by the time of arrival as Aegon the Conqueror had reason to fear 'Queen Marla Sunderland'.

Aegon is another matter. He claims to be a Targaryen. Tommen doesn't. He claims to be a Baratheon, and they are not worth all that much in comparison to the dragons.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

Here's the difference between Arya and Daenerys: Arya's revenge is based on first-hand accounts, watching the death of her family, while Daenerys is based on second-hand accounts, from the bias of her brother about a family she never knew.

Arya is absolute in her vengeance, 100% committed. Daenerys, however, has room in her heart for doubt, and while committed, she is not 100% certain, and has shown a sliver of doubt before. But that doesn't negate her drive for vengeance, it just leaves it open for change down the line.

Dany's desire for vengeance is abstract. It is pretty much worth nothing. She herself was never wronged by these people she wants to punish, and she gives no indication whatsoever that she wants to kill innocent children or other relatives of the enemies of her father. If you can point me to passages where she talks about killing the usurper's children, wife, brothers, and other relations I will change my mind. But as of yet you just present me with claims apparently based on your personal image of the character that is not strictly derived from the text.

Would Dany perhaps punish her enemies in Westeros harshly if, say, King Tommen also crucifies a bunch of people to spite her? Certainly. But the idea that she wants to kill people who have not wronged her makes no sense.

There will be an interesting test to this whole thing - we have her vowing to punish both Mago and Jhaqo very severely for what they did to Eroeh. But will this actually happen? We have to wait and see. But even if it does this still doesn't mean she will punish Tommen or Tyrion or anyone for the crimes of their fathers.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

I think I can respectively agree to disagree here, and this shows the split between our point of views. I honestly think that gazing upon the ruins of the Dragonpit is going to inflict major doubt, and sitting on the cold, monstrous piece of metal (that hasn't really been described to her yet) will reflect the darker path that she has taken. That, and her the revelation about her father, and the shithole that King's Landing really is -- all of these mounts to Dany's doubts.

I doubt she will have time for deep thoughts while the Others are ripping her kingdom to pieces. And why on earth do you think she would be as stupid as thinking that the Others would not eventually come to Asshai?

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

I'll admit when I'm wrong. Apparently, Essos does experience some cold during wintertime. But the Others are bringing the coldest of colds. And a Northern winter is likely to press further down south than ever before.

This will still first severely affect and cripple Dany's enemies, not her. Winter in Essos might already be worse than it is usually in Essos while she is preparing to go Westeros but it should be much worse in the South of Westeros (not to mention the North).

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

Although, I'm having trouble finding the quote about the lagoon of Braavos being frozen. Can you help me out?

It is either in AFfC or ADwD. Perhaps even only in the Mercy chapter.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

I know that the horselords are.. well, lords of horses. But I will be surprised if they equip their horses' hooves to deal with the winter snow like the Northern houses of Westeros did with their march to Winterfell. For there aren't any passages of the Dothraki Sea being draped in snow, just dying grass. 

A large chunk of Stannis' army are right next to these northerners as they adapt to the snow, but they themselves still don't adapt. I doubt that the Dothraki have ever seen a winter that is coming south from beyond the Wall, and they may find difficulty in adapting.

They should fare about as badly as the knights of Westeros. I don't expect the Dothraki to sweep through Westeros in the middle of winter. But they could be used to devastating effect in the coastal regions or even in the Reach if there is not all that much snow at that time.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

I think that Daenerys is being set up for scenario where she leaps before she looks. I don't think any Essosi can imagine what kind of winter is preceding the Others' invasion. They might say "bring some extra blankets and provisions", but they will be marching into a frozen hell. I don't know how much one can really prepare for that. It requires ample anticipation, extreme preparation and radical adaptations. Who amongst Dany's retinue is trained for winter warfare, like a northerner would be in Westeros?

That just doesn't makes any sense narratively. People usually have a reason why they are doing certain things in this series. They are also considering their options. Going to war in winter makes no sense. Why do you think should Daenerys feel compelled to even go to Westeros in winter? She is a young girl. She can wait until the winter is over, right? Saying that will go is no answer why she is going or why she should go.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

I think Daenerys might receive a warning, saying "conquering Westeros is futile now that winter has come. You best turn around." But that won't stop her, let alone help her grasp the perils ahead.

Why not?

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

But what about her new subjects? Those that are hungry? Will Daenerys say "none for you?" How will she maintain order in her city without meeting their greatest demand? 

She certainly will feed the people directly under her power, the people she can reach and send help. But that shouldn't work for huge parts of Westeros.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

I don't think it's going to a walk-inside invasion for the Dothraki against all of the Free Cities. A siege still takes a lot of time. Volantis is already gearing for war, and others may follow suit. "Not knowing what will hit them" won't happen, as Daenerys is hitting Meereen first, and news will spread. If she decides to somehow hit everywhere at once instead of just Meereen, then she's missing out on giving the explicit command on getting food for Westeros.

There is no reason to believe Dany will lead all the Dothraki against Meereen. She can send them to various cities at the same time. If dozens of khalasars move against the Free Cities at the same time many won't know what hit them. They certainly might know that Dothraki are coming but they won't understand that they won't be bribed this time.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

So she's going to leave all these freedmen behind? What if they want to follow her to the ends of the earth? Isn't she getting more men in the khalasar than she would with leaving freedman behind?  What about those who she seeks to rule when she gets over to Westeros?

She is a dragonrider. She can rule both Essos and Westeros. She can try to build a vast empire. Some people certainly will go with her, but she will focus on able-bodied fighters, not women, children, and old people.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

Jaime's siege on Riverrun was in dire need of food. Yes, the Brotherhood without Banners contributed to this, but it was mainly the Blackfish anticipating a siege, as did the masters of Meereen. What's to prevent a defender making these common preparations for a potential sieges?

I doubt Daenerys is going to besiege a lot of places. She will storm them because she will have the strength to do so. And she might lack the time to go through a stupid siege.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

I bet you'll say that Daenerys will just ride in on her dragons to each city while her divided army conquers the entire continent. The timescale doesn't allow this, though. The only places the khalasar should attack in this scenario are Volantis, Myr, and Pentos, all following the turned Iron Fleet.

Qohor and Norvos can also be taken by khalasars. And why are you all the time talking about only a khalasar. Dany will have all the Dothraki, not just one khalasar.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

But they are not Daenerys. And it's Dany's theme, not the theme of House Targaryen.

Well, winter is the time of death. That's what winter means. Dragons might not plant trees but fire also melts snow and ice.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

WHAT?! That quote about food prices being "shockingly high" is from aSoS. It is critical that you understand that the food crisis is only being mitigated by the Tyrells and is far from being resolved.

This was just a few weeks after the Blackwater. ASoS doesn't exactly cover all that much time.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

I think someone who crucifies 163 people without hearing their stories and without trial, whether or not they were complicit in their alleged crimes, shows how far Daenerys will go. And when it comes to exact justice on those who killed her family, how far will she go there?

Killing those 163 people was totally fine within the context of that society. The leadership of Meereen was guilty collectively, just as the Nazi regime was also collectively guilty of the holocaust. 

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

Daenerys herself has painted a caricature of the foes that are responsible for the fall of House Targaryen. Through what method can this be dispelled?

That's not a caricature. Dany's picture of Jaime, Tywin, and Robert is pretty accurate.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

What does Cersei have to offer? Giving Dany the Lannister men that sacked King's Landing?

It is not about what she has to offer, it is whether they are actually natural enemies.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

It will be interesting to see how Tyrion will act if he is on Dany's team and has to take down Tommen, for if Tommen remains alive, he will be a symbol of the previous dynasty. So, who knows, really.

Again, nobody has said anything that Dany has to kill Tommen. He could survive.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

But there is nothing about the Others in this passage. She is Rhaegar killing Robert, imagining that he is ice and that she is fire. This is more than a stretch; you are filling in what you want to see here.

The connection to the Others is the ice. There is no reason that those dreams have to be all that pricise.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

There's nothing to dismiss. Nothing is there. You said that other guy covered the prophetic dream you were referring to, but now there is another prophetic dream? Does that one refer to the Others? Because the one on the Trident does not. The others don't even wear ice as armor. Good golly, man. You might as well say that Robert Baratheon was an Other in disguise.

You know, there is also no literal cloth dragon out there and Stannis still has a shadow. I also very much doubt there are literal blue flowers growing on the Wall.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

Unless she has inside information on the plot in future books, I take Linda's opinion on story development with a heavy grain of salt, as I hear she has a history of close-mindedness.

She has a pretty good grasp of Dany's story. Right now you are the one who defends this Asshai idea of yours against despite the fact that you have actually nothing to back that up beside your personal preferences. If I wanted Dany to cross the Sunset Sea on Drogon at the end of the series I could also build a theory in that direction but there is also no good hint 

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

Dany's mercenaries will also be difficult to keep in line. So will Victarion's forces, should she keep them. And you say this in response to them wanting all the wealth in Essos.

Those are likely to be only a tiny fraction or not going at all. Dany has to take any of those if she doesn't want to. In fact, she could easily enough just take the Iron Fleet and leave the Ironborn to rot in Slaver's Bay. And it is not that unlikely that something of that sort is going to happen.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

Here's the thing: they want all the wealth in Westeros, too. And the capital is the place that is most bankrupt and devoid of treasures. That's what's going to cause a majority of Dany's army to be rife with consternation. Then, regardless of whatever fraction or portion Daenerys decides to bring with her to Westeros, you will see dissension within her own retinue.  

Westeros is nothing wealth-wise in comparison to Volantis or the other Free Cities. Casterly Rock would be a fine price but despite Tyrion's contract they will take what they can get on the way and not insist on the gold of Casterly Rock if they get rich as hell at Yunkai or Volantis.

19 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

And now we expect them to fall in line and do battle against the Others? What's to stop them from just taking up a ship and peacing out?

We will have the Dothraki and Dany's fanatic freedmen, especially the freed tiger soldiers of Volantis. They follow R'hllor and Benerro convinced them that Dany the reborn Azor Ahai.

[SeanF]

On ‎7‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 1:22 AM, Lord Varys said:

Aerys' madness doesn't make the murders of Elia, Aegon, and Rhaenys right. And one could even argue that Dany is also not wrong in demanding vengeance and justice for Rhaegar. Dany is not just wanting to avenge her father.

And while Aerys II certainly should have been deposed there is a very good chance that he was clinically insane and thus not really responsible for many of his actions. Declaring he deserves to die more or less the same as claiming the average schizophrenic in a position of power deserves to die, too. And Jaime most definitely deserves to be punished for his crime. On that basically everyone in Westeros agrees. The only thing that saved him was the name and power of his lord father.

 

In the eyes of most people in-universe, Jaime does deserve to be punished.

But, in my eyes, it was a noble deed.  Even if Aerys was not criminally responsible for his actions, he was still a real danger to thousands of people.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, SeanF said:

In the eyes of most people in-universe, Jaime does deserve to be punished.

But, in my eyes, it was a noble deed.  Even if Aerys was not criminally responsible for his actions, he was still a real danger to thousands of people.

But it is quite clear that he didn't have to kill Aerys to prevent him from implementing the wildfire plot. Killing Rossart was enough. All he needed to do after that was to distract the king or arrest or imprison him. Jaime basically killed Aerys while Tywin's men were already knocking at the doors of the throne room. That's why Tywin's men found him with Aerys' body once they opened the gates. If he had had so much as 1-3 minutes after cutting Aerys' throat he could left the throne room through the king's door and nobody would ever have been able to connect him to the murder.

And I'm pretty sure you would call it 'a noble deed' if Hitler's bodyguard only killed the man after the holocaust was basically over and the war essentially lost. That's more or less what Jaime did. It would have been a noble deed when he intervened years ago while the king was still in charge and power and burning innocent people left and right and raping his sister-wife afterwards. But he did nothing to prevent any of that.

Jaime didn't act out of empathy or compassion there, he simply killed Aerys because he thought he could get away with it. And the last straw wasn't the wildfire plan, it was Aerys commanding Jaime to kill his own father. Jaime had known about the wildfire plans for weeks or months and done nothing to prevent Aerys from implementing it. He didn't even tell Rhaegar about it during their last conversation.

But be that as it may, the rules of the society Jaime lives in are clear. Kingsguard do not kill the kings they are sworn to protect and they have to pay with their lives for such crimes. Jaime does know that and cannot expect any mercy if a Targaryen king (or any other king but Robert) sits in judgment over him.

[SeanF]

4 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

But it is quite clear that he didn't have to kill Aerys to prevent him from implementing the wildfire plot. Killing Rossart was enough. All he needed to do after that was to distract the king or arrest or imprison him. Jaime basically killed Aerys while Tywin's men were already knocking at the doors of the throne room. That's why Tywin's men found him with Aerys' body once they opened the gates. If he had had so much as 1-3 minutes after cutting Aerys' throat he could left the throne room through the king's door and nobody would ever have been able to connect him to the murder.

And I'm pretty sure you would call it 'a noble deed' if Hitler's bodyguard only killed the man after the holocaust was basically over and the war essentially lost. That's more or less what Jaime did. It would have been a noble deed when he intervened years ago while the king was still in charge and power and burning innocent people left and right and raping his sister-wife afterwards. But he did nothing to prevent any of that.

Jaime didn't act out of empathy or compassion there, he simply killed Aerys because he thought he could get away with it. And the last straw wasn't the wildfire plan, it was Aerys commanding Jaime to kill his own father. Jaime had known about the wildfire plans for weeks or months and done nothing to prevent Aerys from implementing it. He didn't even tell Rhaegar about it during their last conversation.

But be that as it may, the rules of the society Jaime lives in are clear. Kingsguard do not kill the kings they are sworn to protect and they have to pay with their lives for such crimes. Jaime does know that and cannot expect any mercy if a Targaryen king (or any other king but Robert) sits in judgment over him.

It would have been better if Jaime had killed Aerys earlier, but that's expecting a lot of a 15 year old.

Hindsight is always a great judge, but it seems to me that killing Aerys, as opposed to trying to arrest him, was a reasonable option. The war was lost, but there were still plenty of Targaryen loyalists fighting on.

WRT Hitler, I would indeed applaud Stauffenberg for his actions.  The war was lost by June 1944, but if he had succeeded, lives would still have been saved.

[Lord Varys]

3 minutes ago, SeanF said:

It would have been better if Jaime had killed Aerys earlier, but that's expecting a lot of a 15 year old.

He was just two years older by the time he finally killed Aerys. But, yes, it is quite clear that being Aerys' Kingsguard played a huge part in twisting Jaime into the man he is now. He was also pretty much a narcissist before, but being Aerys taught him how to shut down his emotions and empathy, and that's how the man later could try to kill Bran.

3 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Hindsight is always a great judge, but it seems to me that killing Aerys, as opposed to trying to arrest him, was a reasonable option. The war was lost, but there were still plenty of Targaryen loyalists fighting on.

That doesn't matter, those men were losing. And Tywin or Robert most certainly would also have killed Aerys, but Jaime's hands would have been much cleaner. He would have still sort of betrayed his king but in light of the command to kill Tywin and the wildfire plot (if he had talked about that - which he would have if his true motive for killing Aerys had been to save the city and its people) it would have been much easier for Robert to pardon such a man than the Kingslayer.

It would have been somewhat akin to Barristan Selmy or those Kingsguard who abandoned Maegor the Cruel in favor of Jaehaerys in the last days of the former's reign. Even more so if Jaime hadn't arrested Aerys but merely occupied or distracted him until Tywin's men arrived, for instance by telling him a story that the blood on his sword was indeed Tywin's and the corpse of the man was outside, or something of that sort. We are talking about minutes here. Jaime comes in and says 'Rossart's' when Aerys asks him about the blood, and then the man tries to run away, Jaime follows him, knocks him down, and cuts his throat. That would have taken 1-2 minutes, one assumes. And Tywin's men came into the throne room immediately thereafter.

3 minutes ago, SeanF said:

WRT Hitler, I would indeed applaud Stauffenberg for his actions.  The war was lost by June 1944, but if he had succeeded, lives would still have been saved.

Well, that was a planned coup involving to seize power and kill/imprison the entire Nazi elite. That is somewhat different. The comparison here is a bodyguard killing the big bad for his crimes shortly before his people defeating the big bad can do that themselves. That isn't exactly a noble deed, even more so if you have been involved in many of those crimes either not preventing them or actively participating in them. And I'm pretty sure Jaime was involved in many of the executions Aerys arranged by dragging in prisoners, chaining them to the pyre, etc. As Kingsguard, he would have obeyed every command Aerys gave him until he did not.

And as to Stauffenberg - the whole thing certainly could have shortened the war, but the man and his allies were just a little bit less right-wing than the Nazi regime. If the Allies actually had accepted a conditional surrender or something of that sort then we just might have ended up with some sort of a little bit less vile military dictatorship. From my point of view that would have been significantly worse than what we got after 1945, despite the fact that a lot of people had to die for that.

And there were other much more productive Hitler assassination attempts, most notably this guy who grew up in a small town not far from where I grew up. But he poses the interesting conundrum whether this would have been/was murder or actual okay since it had a pretty good chance to actually prevent World War II as we got it.

[dregs4NED]

On 7/21/2017 at 6:34 AM, Lord Varys said:

Dany most likely is going to establish some sort of empire where the cities are granted the right to rule themselves within the boundaries she as queen/empress allows them.

...

The Dothraki are not suddenly going to abandon their nomadic lifestyle just because Dany united them. But they might be forced to free their slaves.

One of the themes that has plagued Daenerys in ruling Essos so far is of her inability to keep her forms of government established in her absence. What is going to change when she finally heads to Westeros? What's stopping the Dothraki from taking back their slaves once Dany heads to Westeros?

On 7/21/2017 at 11:07 AM, Sea Dragon said:

From what I understand Linda does help give the author fact checks and works with the continuity of the story . She and her husband both do. I don't think the controversy around her has anything to do with how she helps work on the books before they go to print. 

Fact check some things, yes, but not help guide his writing in plots. If Linda and Elio do have knowledge of Dany's path, wouldn't GRRM be remiss if they're dropping hints like this online? Plus, all she has mentioned is she believes that Dany will be taking a dark path. She may well do so, but that doesn't exclude Dany's ability to return to a lighter side.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

Aerys' madness doesn't make the murders of Elia, Aegon, and Rhaenys right. And one could even argue that Dany is also not wrong in demanding vengeance and justice for Rhaegar. Dany is not just wanting to avenge her father.

And while Aerys II certainly should have been deposed there is a very good chance that he was clinically insane and thus not really responsible for many of his actions. Declaring he deserves to die more or less the same as claiming the average schizophrenic in a position of power deserves to die, too. And Jaime most definitely deserves to be punished for his crime. On that basically everyone in Westeros agrees. The only thing that saved him was the name and power of his lord father.

I agree! Although, demanding vengeance + justice for Rhaegar is a bit too late, and still wanting it demonstrates how her drive for vengeance has not diminished despite the deaths of those who were responsible, and thus her motive for revenge will carry on.

On 7/24/2017 at 5:23 AM, Lord Varys said:

But it is quite clear that he didn't have to kill Aerys to prevent him from implementing the wildfire plot. Killing Rossart was enough. 

In what way is this quite clear? I challenge you to find me some text that supports this!

I really don't see how Aerys could have been simply deposed at that point. Jaime conks him on the head? Setting up a trial, without fear that some acolyte might still carry out Aerys' wish to demolish the city? Jaime ended his madness and the threat that came with it, for so long as Aerys breathed life, his power to command someone to burn the city still lived.

So, Jaime being definitely deserving of punishment is highly questionable, as he saved the city that Daenerys seeks to rule with his most notorious act. And it is exactly this reason, should the two meet, that it will be an interesting scene seeing Jaime throw this in Dany's face.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

Marwyn isn't seeking a dragon. Marwyn is seeking Daenerys to tell her about the Others.

Here's some things that you probably haven't considered about Marwyn:

• He is a known consort of blood magic users, particularly of the one who crippled Dany's Sun and Stars. Will Daenerys will be open-armed about his service and his message? How would Marwyn convince Dany of this threat?
• Instead of trying to protect him, Marwyn actually might have been looking to suppress Samwell from alerting everyone else about the threat beyond the Wall. Marwyn might be a bit egocentric and is looking to claim credit of the message. Because, why not take Sam with him?
• What will Marwyn do if he cannot convince Daenerys? Will he attempt to take matters into his own hands?

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

There is no destiny in this series in this strict sense. There are prophecies and visions that come true, but there is no grand plan, nor divine hand guiding things. And in that sense you can decide to reject your destiny. You may not be able to prevent prophecies from becoming true but some prophecy coming true doesn't mean it was your destiny that you did the prophesied thing.

But that's what destiny means, following any path towards a predetermined end, regardless if you have went left or right, and regardless if you gain insight on what each path consists of or might lead to. You can't say that destiny is one outcome, and say that they avoided destiny when it doesn't happen, because then it wasn't destiny. Everyone would have infinite number of destinies if it can be avoided.

And, to say it once again, your examples of Jon and Dany attempting to avoid their destiny but still heading towards it, is proof that it cannot be avoided if it is truly their destiny.

Lastly, to say that GRRM was trying to make a point in how characters can avoid destiny is to make error in what a character's destiny is and to make assumption on the author's intent.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

She learns that Robert is dead. But this doesn't mean she transfers her hatred of Robert to Tommen or Joffrey. And the same goes for Ned-Robb, Bran, etc., or Jon Arryn/Hoster Tully and their children. She never even mentioned Tyrion, Cersei, Edmure, etc. in the story. The idea that she wants those people dead is about as likely as the claim that Arya wanting to murder Queen Cersei also means she wants to kill King Tommen or Daven Lannister, etc.

I agree! She doesn't transfer her vengeance to, well, anywhere! It's bottling up, despite the number of outlets that are being hijacked from her. It'll be interesting to see if she releases her will for vengeance, perhaps in some catharsis that will wrap up this motive. Arya's hit-list is precise; she has names, and reasons to kill each person. Dany's drive for vengeance is more abstract, and its outlet is being more occluded over time. Her only outlet can be of her slaying someone who has the name of her enemy but was innocent in the whole affair, and then her reflecting on her own wrongdoing. So she may very well kill someone like Tommen due to unmitigated vengeance, then regret it later.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

And you actually interpret this literally?

No. You said Dany is not about vengeance, and I provided you a quote showing you that she blatantly is.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

Dany has nothing to do with the ridiculous Bracken-Blackwood feud. The Baratheons and Targaryens were friends and kin for a very long time. They had a bad time with Robert and Aerys II but that doesn't have to remain this way. Quite a few people think that Dany might pick up Edric Storm at Lys on way to Westeros, legitimizing him and restoring a Baratheon to Storm's End. Stannis and Shireen are not likely to survive the series, and Dany won't allow Aegon's people to keep the castle.

I was simply trying to relate to your saying that Daenerys might come to the realization that a path to vengeance is nothing more than repeating the sins of the past. The Bracken-Blackwood is in that vein, of people caught up in the sins of their forefathers. I apologize for a crude analogy. I'm not trying to compare their feuds between houses.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

I would even doubt that Tommen has to be killed to be dethroned. Jaime intends to reveal the truth about his parentage. The bastards of Jaime and Cersei Lannister are neither royal children nor kings. They are just noble bastards. And we know that even crowned (alleged) royal bastards - like Gaemon Palehair - were dethroned and then not killed. Daenerys Targaryen will have as much reason to fear a 'King Tommen' by the time of arrival as Aegon the Conqueror had reason to fear 'Queen Marla Sunderland'.

Aegon is another matter. He claims to be a Targaryen. Tommen doesn't. He claims to be a Baratheon, and they are not worth all that much in comparison to the dragons.

I understand where you're coming from. It seems a bit idyllic to me; it's a scenario where "no one has to die" and "truth sets everyone free". Not exactly a page-turner, but we'll see how the story actually plays out.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

Dany's desire for vengeance is abstract. It is pretty much worth nothing.

Tell that to Daenerys. LOL!

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

If you can point me to passages where she talks about killing the usurper's children, wife, brothers, and other relations I will change my mind. But as of yet you just present me with claims apparently based on your personal image of the character that is not strictly derived from the text.

The text is not there. All I am doing is making a general claim, but it is grounded in reasoned logic. For her desire for vengeance is not worth nothing, as it has been one of the motives that is guiding her west in the first place. And when she gets there without somewhere to put the retribution she was looking to exact, well, coming up empty-handed is a shitty feeling. Her motive for vengeance has to go somewhere, and you haven't offered me any other possibility for this motive to be resolved.

I am simply exploring options on what one does with a hijacked vengeance. The two paths that can come from this is (1) her veins thicken for not being able to fulfill one of her greatest desires, and she is not going to settle for failure, or (2) deep in her heart, the knot comes loose. Through some event or truthtelling, she is able to forgive her enemies and lay her wish to cast revenge aside.

I personally believe that both of these points will happen, that she will lash out and then learn from her mistake. Killing an innocent in an uncompromising attempt to fulfill her vengeance will lead her to understand the nature of vengeance and cause the knot to come loose.

 

One or the other can happen, too, but definitely not neither. Something's gotta give, and it will likely come in the form of fire and blood. For she has been holding on to this motive for so long, and to simply let it go is to cast away an element of her arc that could otherwise be building towards something.

 

Why are you so willing to dismiss Dany's motive for vengeance? What makes you believe that it is a zero-sum motive? Have you ever relished a zero-sum motive before that makes you wish the vengeance-motive will be like that?

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

I doubt she will have time for deep thoughts while the Others are ripping her kingdom to pieces. And why on earth do you think she would be as stupid as thinking that the Others would not eventually come to Asshai?

She has time to conquer Essos but not a moment to pause and ruminate on why she has taken the Iron Throne once she sits on it? There is always time for reflection, because that's what makes a story great, to learn of a conflict in someone's heart. It's not all about action sequences, and you know that.

The Others may come for Asshai, sure. But secrets of dragonglass are in Asshai. So that's a super-important reason why Dany might want to go to Asshai, to save the world n' all. This would fulfill Quaithe's quote, that if Dany wants to save the west, she must travel east.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

This will still first severely affect and cripple Dany's enemies, not her. Winter in Essos might already be worse than it is usually in Essos while she is preparing to go Westeros but it should be much worse in the South of Westeros (not to mention the North).

Daenerys will not be immune to winter in Westeros. As soon as she enters the region where her enemies are being crippled, so shall she become crippled as well. And winter in King's Landing is currently worse than it is in Braavos, which the former is more south than the latter. 

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

It is either in AFfC or ADwD. Perhaps even only in the Mercy chapter.

I can't find it :/

Help me?

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

They should fare about as badly as the knights of Westeros. I don't expect the Dothraki to sweep through Westeros in the middle of winter. But they could be used to devastating effect in the coastal regions or even in the Reach if there is not all that much snow at that time.

This is very fair, and like this notion.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

That just doesn't makes any sense narratively. People usually have a reason why they are doing certain things in this series. They are also considering their options. Going to war in winter makes no sense. Why do you think should Daenerys feel compelled to even go to Westeros in winter? She is a young girl. She can wait until the winter is over, right? Saying that will go is no answer why she is going or why she should go.

It makes sense when the narrative is about being disillusioned from preconceptions. Currently, she believes that her western heading is taking her to "kinder lands". That her father's death was unjust. That Westeros is the ultimate prize. That she will find "home" in Westeros.

I'm surprised that Daenerys prolonging her conquest even further is on the table. I'm not saying you're wrong, and that if she has all the information, then hell yeah, stay away from Westeros! Stay away from winter! But you're also saying that if she has all the information, such as the Others' invasion, then she should head to Westeros during winter, which "makes no sense," as it's winter warfare. 

 

You're essentially positing a strict series of events. She hears of winter in Westeros, and then says, "I will wait out winter to conquer Westeros." She will then, what, bide her time conquering and ruling Essos, okay. She will then hear about the Others and say, "This requires my dragonfire" and, damning the consequences, heads to Westeros to fight a supernatural war. It's a bit convoluted, especially considering the timescale. 

 

But the thing is, she currently does not have any of this information, she already has multiple motives to head west, and still has full intention on go to Westeros. Why are you dismissing all of this? I'd rather read on how Daenerys leaps before she looks than how she learns of winter, drops out from all her previous motives, then hears about the Others and redecides to conquer the Iron Throne.

 

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

She certainly will feed the people directly under her power, the people she can reach and send help. But that shouldn't work for huge parts of Westeros.

So she will have sufficient rations for her army AND for the population of King's Landing? That's a large number of mouths to feed. And rather convenient, being able to do what House Tyrell could not do, which is to resolve the food crisis in KL.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

There is no reason to believe Dany will lead all the Dothraki against Meereen. She can send them to various cities at the same time. If dozens of khalasars move against the Free Cities at the same time many won't know what hit them. They certainly might know that Dothraki are coming but they won't understand that they won't be bribed this time.

"They won't know what hit them"

"They certainly might know that Dothraki are coming"

Okay.  So they definitely will need to siege if their forces are divided. Sieges take a lot of time. Are you expecting a montage where she rides her dragon, visits every besieged city to help sack it with blankets of dragonfire, then she steals all of their food for her own army, knowing that she needs it for winter? This is stacking to be quite a tall order. And feeling rather idyllic. Honestly, if these are her upcoming chapters, I don't look forward to it; there's no conflict and nothing worth reading.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

She is a dragonrider. She can rule both Essos and Westeros. She can try to build a vast empire. Some people certainly will go with her, but she will focus on able-bodied fighters, not women, children, and old people.

She can't even rule the three cities of Slaver's Bay. What's going to change? Resacking the cities with more forces? She's going to install mercenary companies and Dothraki in every city? The biggest adversity in ruling Essos is Dany's ability to rule. That's what her arc was about in Meereen. What's going to change? 

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

This was just a few weeks after the Blackwater. ASoS doesn't exactly cover all that much time.

That doesn't support your idea that the food crisis has been resolved. It's still in full bloom. It's still a problem. It's one of the pillars of my entire post, so I heartily invite you to prove your point here.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

Killing those 163 people was totally fine within the context of that society. The leadership of Meereen was guilty collectively, just as the Nazi regime was also collectively guilty of the holocaust. 

That's quite an assumption to say that they are all guilty collectively. There's nothing suggesting that that's the context of their society. You're neglecting the potential nuances of a society because, as a reader, you are looking from the outside on in. You'd call the masters of Meereen Nazis, but what's stopping Daenerys from labeling all of the Usurper's dogs (all houses involved) the same thing? Because you know the nuances of the Westerosi houses, you are able to make an informed decision on how to dispense justice. But Daenerys won't be in this boat. It's presumptuous to say otherwise.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

That's not a caricature. Dany's picture of Jaime, Tywin, and Robert is pretty accurate.

She doesn't really have a picture of these people. Except in the framework of them being her father's killers. What makes you say she has an accurate picture of these people?

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

It is not about what she has to offer, it is whether they are actually natural enemies.

As she is a prominent member of House Lannister, she is a natural enemy of House Targaryen. To bridge this, Cersei needs to have something to offer (if she is in a position of power when she meets Dany). If anything, she has amounted numerous crimes since Robert's Rebellions.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

Again, nobody has said anything that Dany has to kill Tommen. He could survive.

And I didn't say that Dany has to, either. I am not excluding the possibility of his survival. What I am saying is that if this scenario's happens, it would be really cool!  What you are saying is, that there is a possibility of this really cool thing not happening. Okay, way to be a downer. Why bother responding with this? It was implicit in the first place of my saying that it could happen, that sure, it can't happen, too. If you wish to discuss the merits of it happening or not happening, that would be something worth mentioning.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

The connection to the Others is the ice. There is no reason that those dreams have to be all that pricise.

And there is no reason for you to connect these two dots. It's a stretch to connect the invasion of the Others with Robert being made of ice in a dream, whose context doesn't serve any relation about the Others. The context of the dream is about (in)justice and the feeling of vanquishing enemies. Your line of reasoning is more than a stretch of logic; you're plugging in what you want to see.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

You know, there is also no literal cloth dragon out there and Stannis still has a shadow. I also very much doubt there are literal blue flowers growing on the Wall.

The visions she had in the House of the Undying are prophetic. Dany's dream of the Trident is not. Even if Daenerys becomes the prince that was promised, it will not have any relation with her dream on the Trident. The text itself says that Dany acknowledged that it was just a dream, but she was just trying to relish the feeling of triumph. 

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

She has a pretty good grasp of Dany's story. Right now you are the one who defends this Asshai idea of yours against despite the fact that you have actually nothing to back that up beside your personal preferences. If I wanted Dany to cross the Sunset Sea on Drogon at the end of the series I could also build a theory in that direction but there is also no good hint 

She probably has an excellent grasp of Dany's story. She may be correct in suggesting Dany's dark path. But I don't believe she knows of Dany's destiny, and I do not believe she can objectively debate about it because she has demonstrated that she devolves to name-calling, suggesting that she rigidly adheres to her own outlook rather than be open-minded about outside ideas.

As I'm sensing with you, too. I laid down my line of reasoning, which you've dismissed on the terms that it does not adhere to your "prince that was promised" notion. You once said that you "don't feel comfortable predicting Dany's campaign in Westeros", but you have said multiple times that "she will" take certain actions in Essos and will be taking on the Others in fulfilling the role as savior to the seven kingdoms. You went as far as to call a significant chunk of my post "completely baseless" because you don't like it.

I have taken care to put my thoughts to word. My arguments have basis and I have striven to be open-minded about the events ahead. I didn't come to my conclusion first and build my theory based on it. I recognized the potential of disillusionment for Daenerys in her journey and explored a particular outcome because of it. If you don't agree, that's fine, but you're no longer criticizing constructively.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

Those are likely to be only a tiny fraction or not going at all. Dany has to take any of those if she doesn't want to. In fact, she could easily enough just take the Iron Fleet and leave the Ironborn to rot in Slaver's Bay. And it is not that unlikely that something of that sort is going to happen.

I have pondered myself if she will take the Ironborn as part of her retinue versus just taking their ships. Difficult to separate the two, but possible. But you mentioned before that she will probably only take a fraction of the Dothraki, and now a fraction of her mercenaries. The bulk of her army currently consists of freedmen. Who exactly will she be taking with her to Westeros? And why?

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

Westeros is nothing wealth-wise in comparison to Volantis or the other Free Cities. Casterly Rock would be a fine price but despite Tyrion's contract they will take what they can get on the way and not insist on the gold of Casterly Rock if they get rich as hell at Yunkai or Volantis.

Thanks for agreeing with me. There is not much to plunder in Westeros. Hopefully, Dany does not take any soldiers west in the promise of riches.

On 7/21/2017 at 5:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

We will have the Dothraki and Dany's fanatic freedmen, especially the freed tiger soldiers of Volantis. They follow R'hllor and Benerro convinced them that Dany the reborn Azor Ahai.

That's a tall order, there. I suppose that we will also have Dany's banner be a three-headed dragon enveloped in a heart of flame?

 

[Lord Varys]

16 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

One of the themes that has plagued Daenerys in ruling Essos so far is of her inability to keep her forms of government established in her absence. What is going to change when she finally heads to Westeros? What's stopping the Dothraki from taking back their slaves once Dany heads to Westeros?

Her burning their entire elite alive with the help of the Dothraki who worship her as a living god, perhaps? Dany's Dothraki - the one who joined her at Drogo's pyre - also no longer keep slaves.

16 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

I agree! Although, demanding vengeance + justice for Rhaegar is a bit too late, and still wanting it demonstrates how her drive for vengeance has not diminished despite the deaths of those who were responsible, and thus her motive for revenge will carry on.

Still, she is morally obliged to avenge her family and take back what she has lost. Just as Robb was morally obliged to try to free and avenge Ned. It does not matter what your family did to lose a war or be executed. As noble or royal in this world you have to defend the honor and name of your family no matter what the members of your family did.

You don't give a blood claim your family had to this or that title or throne. That goes against the very identity of the nobility/royalty in this world.

16 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

In what way is this quite clear? I challenge you to find me some text that supports this!

I really don't see how Aerys could have been simply deposed at that point. Jaime conks him on the head? Setting up a trial, without fear that some acolyte might still carry out Aerys' wish to demolish the city? Jaime ended his madness and the threat that came with it, for so long as Aerys breathed life, his power to command someone to burn the city still lived.

So, Jaime being definitely deserving of punishment is highly questionable, as he saved the city that Daenerys seeks to rule with his most notorious act. And it is exactly this reason, should the two meet, that it will be an interesting scene seeing Jaime throw this in Dany's face.

If you read the text you will realize that Jaime killed Aerys mere minutes before Tywin's men entered the throne room. And both Jaime and Aerys knew that the situation was this bad. All Jaime had needed to do to prevent the execution of the wildfire plot and prevent becoming a Kingslayer would have been indeed to distract, arrest, or knock out Aerys. Then he could have handed him over to Tywin who could have killed him or kept him for Eddard or Robert.

As to the motive being 'saving KL' - if that had been the case why on earth made Jaime no attempt to recover all that wildfire hidden beneath the city. What Jaime did may have been only to postpone the inevitable because he took it on himself to kill all the alchemists. Had he any guarantee that Rossart's buddies would not burn down the city, say, half an hour after he killed Aerys? No. Yet he didn't tell Tywin's men or his father about the entire plan.

16 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

Here's some things that you probably haven't considered about Marwyn:

• He is a known consort of blood magic users, particularly of the one who crippled Dany's Sun and Stars. Will Daenerys will be open-armed about his service and his message? How would Marwyn convince Dany of this threat?
• Instead of trying to protect him, Marwyn actually might have been looking to suppress Samwell from alerting everyone else about the threat beyond the Wall. Marwyn might be a bit egocentric and is looking to claim credit of the message. Because, why not take Sam with him?
• What will Marwyn do if he cannot convince Daenerys? Will he attempt to take matters into his own hands?

Marwyn just met Mirri Maz Duur once. Dany forgave Barristan Selmy who actually served Robert. Marwyn had no hand in Mirri's actions.

Tyrion could help to convince Dany that Marwyn's story is true. It involves Jon and Tyrion is friends with Jon and was at the Wall himself. The entire point of Tyrion going to the Wall is that he will be able to establish a connection between Dany and Jon and help them deal with the Others.

Sam has come to Oldtown to become a maester. He has a job to do. He isn't free to go to Slaver's Bay. That would make him an oathbreaker.

Marwyn knows the prophecy about the promised prince. He is not going to take matters in his own hands to fulfill some prophecy. He knows that's not exactly the smart thing to do.

16 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

But that's what destiny means, following any path towards a predetermined end, regardless if you have went left or right, and regardless if you gain insight on what each path consists of or might lead to. You can't say that destiny is one outcome, and say that they avoided destiny when it doesn't happen, because then it wasn't destiny. Everyone would have infinite number of destinies if it can be avoided.

Destiny in that sense doesn't exist in this world. We have just some glimpses of the future, devoid of context. That's not destiny, that just are little pieces of stuff that's going to happen.

16 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

I agree! She doesn't transfer her vengeance to, well, anywhere! It's bottling up, despite the number of outlets that are being hijacked from her. It'll be interesting to see if she releases her will for vengeance, perhaps in some catharsis that will wrap up this motive. Arya's hit-list is precise; she has names, and reasons to kill each person. Dany's drive for vengeance is more abstract, and its outlet is being more occluded over time. Her only outlet can be of her slaying someone who has the name of her enemy but was innocent in the whole affair, and then her reflecting on her own wrongdoing. So she may very well kill someone like Tommen due to unmitigated vengeance, then regret it later.

This abstract vengeance is pretty much irrelevant in comparison to deep-seated hatred Arya feels for certain people. Arya had no place to murder Weese, Chiswyck, or the Tickler - she was mistreated and abused by those people but they did not torture or kill her, personally, right? Avenging Lommy by killing Raff is acceptable, but by the rules of the society she lives in she should be hanged for murdering the Bolton guard, Dareon, and the insurance guy.

Dany basically hates none of those Usurper's Dogs and certainly not their children and other kin. She doesn't even know those people. It isn't even clear whether she would be willing to pardon even a man like Robert for his actions once she actually gets the complete picture of the war. 

Dany isn't an angry or hateful person, either. We have to wait and see how she reacts when she is in Westeros. I'm reasonably confident that she is actually going to work with some of the houses that deposed her father while fighting against many Targaryen loyalists who stood with Aerys II during the Rebellion because they now stand with Aegon.

And it will also be Aegon who avenges House Targaryen on the Baratheons, Lannisters, Starks, etc. He is the one who is likely to end the line of the usurper, not Daenerys.

17 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

No. You said Dany is not about vengeance, and I provided you a quote showing you that she blatantly is.

Dany is much more about home than vengeance.

Oh, I'm sure Tommen, Myrcella, Cersei, Jaime, etc. will eventually die. I just don't think Dany will be involved in that. It is much more likely that Aegon or Euron or Catelyn or Littlefinger/Sansa will be involved in that. Dany is very likely to come far too late for any of that.

Obsidian is to be found pretty much everywhere.

Dany could reconsider her conquest once she is on the Iron Throne. But if she doesn't abandon the slaves she freed - and it seems she isn't going to do that - then she is also not likely to abandon Westeros.

If Dany knows about the Others she has to go to Westeros now, before it is too late. Never mind winter. If the Others win spring is not going to come again. But if she still believes this is all just some mundane conquest of a continent she can gather her strength and wait for spring. Why shouldn't she?

I actually think her entire decision to go west will be triggered by the news about the Others. Aegon might also play into that but the Others will be more important.

If she waited a couple of years her dragons would be much larger and her chance to crush her enemies would be much easier.

And winter will long have set in both in Westeros and Essos before Dany even begins her journey west. She might even visit a snowy Vaes Dothrak.

17 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

So she will have sufficient rations for her army AND for the population of King's Landing? That's a large number of mouths to feed. And rather convenient, being able to do what House Tyrell could not do, which is to resolve the food crisis in KL.

KL might long be depopulated by the time Dany finally arrives there. There might be a greyscale/grey plague pandemic and quite a lot of additional fighting long before Dany arrives.

17 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

"They won't know what hit them"

"They certainly might know that Dothraki are coming"

Okay.  So they definitely will need to siege if their forces are divided. Sieges take a lot of time. Are you expecting a montage where she rides her dragon, visits every besieged city to help sack it with blankets of dragonfire, then she steals all of their food for her own army, knowing that she needs it for winter? This is stacking to be quite a tall order. And feeling rather idyllic. Honestly, if these are her upcoming chapters, I don't look forward to it; there's no conflict and nothing worth reading.

No, what I expect are chapters where Dany and other POVs receive news about what transpired elsewhere. Just as we learned about Robb's campaigns in ACoK.

She will sent khalasars against the cities on land and move her armada west at the same time. They will then pick up the people at Volantis, Myr, and Pentos. That is not that hard to imagine.

She will kill all her enemies this time.

17 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

That doesn't support your idea that the food crisis has been resolved. It's still in full bloom. It's still a problem. It's one of the pillars of my entire post, so I heartily invite you to prove your point here.

See above. KL might more or less a ruin or at least in very deep trouble by the time she arrives.

17 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

That's quite an assumption to say that they are all guilty collectively. There's nothing suggesting that that's the context of their society. You're neglecting the potential nuances of a society because, as a reader, you are looking from the outside on in. You'd call the masters of Meereen Nazis, but what's stopping Daenerys from labeling all of the Usurper's dogs (all houses involved) the same thing? Because you know the nuances of the Westerosi houses, you are able to make an informed decision on how to dispense justice. But Daenerys won't be in this boat. It's presumptuous to say otherwise.

The Usurper's Dogs all rebelled against Aerys II. In that sense they are guilty. The Great Masters of Meereen collectively made the decision to crucify 163 slave children. They also collectively opposed and fought against Daenerys and collectively maintained slavery in Meereen. They are all guilty. They young children might be innocent, sure, and Dany didn't crucify any children, right.

Her mistake there is that she did not kill them all.

17 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

She doesn't really have a picture of these people. Except in the framework of them being her father's killers. What makes you say she has an accurate picture of these people?

The way things are portrayed. Nobody ever indicates that those people were innocent.

17 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

As she is a prominent member of House Lannister, she is a natural enemy of House Targaryen. To bridge this, Cersei needs to have something to offer (if she is in a position of power when she meets Dany). If anything, she has amounted numerous crimes since Robert's Rebellions.

No, Cersei is not the natural enemy of House Targaryen. If Aegon VI Targaryen rules Westeros by the time Dany arrives Cersei and House Lannister might be the natural allies of Daenerys Targaryen.

17 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

And there is no reason for you to connect these two dots. It's a stretch to connect the invasion of the Others with Robert being made of ice in a dream, whose context doesn't serve any relation about the Others. The context of the dream is about (in)justice and the feeling of vanquishing enemies. Your line of reasoning is more than a stretch of logic; you're plugging in what you want to see.

The visions she had in the House of the Undying are prophetic. Dany's dream of the Trident is not. Even if Daenerys becomes the prince that was promised, it will not have any relation with her dream on the Trident. The text itself says that Dany acknowledged that it was just a dream, but she was just trying to relish the feeling of triumph. 

I suggest you reread the stories and scenes depicting those dragon dreams. Daeron the Drunk dreams of a dying dragon collapsing on Dunk. Daemon II Blackfyre dreams about a dragon egg hatching at Whitewalls yet both those images don't come true literally. Not all aspects of a prophetic dream have to come true in a literal sense. The enemies armored in ice might represent the Others just as literal dragons can represent Targaryens in prophetic dreams.

And the fact that Dany - who seems to be the promised princess - is Rhaegar in her dream strongly indicates she is the real Rhaegar as the real promised princess. Rhaegar mistakenly believed he was the promised prince, after all.

17 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

As I'm sensing with you, too. I laid down my line of reasoning, which you've dismissed on the terms that it does not adhere to your "prince that was promised" notion. You once said that you "don't feel comfortable predicting Dany's campaign in Westeros", but you have said multiple times that "she will" take certain actions in Essos and will be taking on the Others in fulfilling the role as savior to the seven kingdoms. You went as far as to call a significant chunk of my post "completely baseless" because you don't like it.

We have the original outline. We pretty much know Dany is going to live until the end of the series, conquer Westeros, and play a role in the fight against the Others. And it is also much easier to guess at what Dany will do when she controls the Dothraki than how her conquest of Westeros will unfold when we don't know yet where and what Euron, Aegon, Cersei, Littlefinger, Stannis, Catelyn, the Martells, etc. will be by that time.

If you try to predict the course of the story at the end of ACoK without considering that the possibility that Joffrey, Robb, and Tywin may die before Dany arrives in Westeros you would make a similar mistake.

17 hours ago, dregs4NED said:

I have pondered myself if she will take the Ironborn as part of her retinue versus just taking their ships. Difficult to separate the two, but possible. But you mentioned before that she will probably only take a fraction of the Dothraki, and now a fraction of her mercenaries. The bulk of her army currently consists of freedmen. Who exactly will she be taking with her to Westeros? And why?

Thanks for agreeing with me. There is not much to plunder in Westeros. Hopefully, Dany does not take any soldiers west in the promise of riches.

That's a tall order, there. I suppose that we will also have Dany's banner be a three-headed dragon enveloped in a heart of flame?

The idea would be that she takes only those men with her that are fanatic followers of hers. Not people that are only looking forward to plunder.

[Sea Dragon]

 

On 7/25/2017 at 11:59 PM, dregs4NED said:

Fact check some things, yes, but not help guide his writing in plots. If Linda and Elio do have knowledge of Dany's path, wouldn't GRRM be remiss if they're dropping hints like this online? Plus, all she has mentioned is she believes that Dany will be taking a dark path. She may well do so, but that doesn't exclude Dany's ability to return to a lighter side.

You are rather confusing me. If anything what Linda says supports your ideas that you keep making in this thread. Linda and Ran don't know everything but they know more than we do and for that reason is why I would trust them over regular posters on forums such as this. You also say in this very post that Daenerys is all about her vengeance and her unavoidable destiny. So this is why your comments are not consistent and confusing. I am not trying to sound mean but I just don't understand your debate at this point.

 

[norwaywolf123]

On 13.7.2017 at 6:43 AM, Hodor the Articulate said:

This assumes every potential Targ ally will automatically back Young Griff, and won't ever switch alliances, but the end of ADWD suggests everyone in Westeros questions his claim. There's a reason the original plan was to marry him to Dany.

Also, Westeros' xenophobia is exaggerated, and only seems to a problem for Dany for some reason. Unless Dany gives them the impression that she plans to make honeyed locusts the national food, I can't see why anyone would care what her army is comprised of.

As for Dany's identity issues, erm see the whole of ADWD. Been there, done that.

I can certainly see conflict with the Faith happening, though. I think Dany will be popular among the smallfolk, and will thus be a threat to the HS's power.

Dont you think there will be more xenophobia in the future as food shortages begin. There will be compitition for food.

[Hodor the Articulate]

12 hours ago, norwaywolf123 said:

Dont you think there will be more xenophobia in the future as food shortages begin. There will be compitition for food.

No, how would it lead to continent-wide xenophobia? Dany's people aren't going to be wandering around Westeros, they'll be confined to whatever region she conquers/is trying to conquer.