Jump to content

Archived

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

3sm1r

Why is Jon going back to Dragonstone?

Recommended Posts

Why isn't he going to Winterfell? What does he still need to do in Dragonstone (a part from Dany, of course)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because WF is too close for him to be able to heal up for the boatsex.

 

Seriously, though, he has perishable cargo in a wight South of the Wall and time is of the essence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ShadowKitteh said:

They're not going to Dragonstone. They're going to Kings Landing to show the wight to Cersei so she'll "believe" where the real threat lies.

In fact, both places are on the same bay.  Even if they stop by Dragonstone, it doesn't detract from the need to get the wight to show Cersei for some undecipherable reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Illiterati said:

In fact, both places are on the same bay.  Even if they stop by Dragonstone, it doesn't detract from the need to get the wight to show Cersei for some undecipherable reason.

Why do you say it's undecipherable? Seems they've been crystal clear about Cersei being close-minded regarding the Army of the Dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ShadowKitteh said:

Why do you say it's undecipherable? Seems they've been crystal clear about Cersei being close-minded regarding the Army of the Dead.

Their reason for needing to convince her.  They should have none.  She isn't going to provide support for the effort anyway, Tyrion knows that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 3sm1r said:

Why isn't he going to Winterfell? What does he still need to do in Dragonstone (a part from Dany, of course)?

He doesn't need to do Dany in Dragonstone, he can do her on the boat.

They're going to King's Landing to bring the wight to the armistice meeting.

They might stop off at Dragonstone, because it's barely out of the way, and they might want to pick up Tyrion or some of her other advisors or a guard of a few thousand Dothraki to stand outside the gates looking surly. That would be reasonable.

Or they might go straight to KL, and have Tyrion and friends take another boat to meet them in the Blackwater. That would also be reasonable.

Either way, it takes long enough for him to have time to do Dany, but not so long that the wight will rot away before they arrive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ShadowKitteh said:

Why do you say it's undecipherable? Seems they've been crystal clear about Cersei being close-minded regarding the Army of the Dead.

When? The only time Cersei has talked about it was when she told Jaime that the armistice might be good strategy, and they'll have to prepare to defeat the dead the same way they've defeated everybody else. That doesn't sound like someone who's dismissed the idea closed-mindedly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, falcotron said:

When? The only time Cersei has talked about it was when she told Jaime that the armistice might be good strategy, and they'll have to prepare to defeat the dead the same way they've defeated everybody else. That doesn't sound like someone who's dismissed the idea closed-mindedly.

Except she didn't say "the dead". She said "our enemies". She said they need to be prepared to fight them the way their father would. Which is an obvious nod to the Red Wedding. 

She is going to try and spring a trap on Jon and Dany when they get to Kings Landing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course she is.  And I reiterate, why does Tyrion feel compelled to prove anything to her.  Burn down the red keep, convince the leaderless army of the threat that looms, and go TCB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, falcotron said:

When? The only time Cersei has talked about it was when she told Jaime that the armistice might be good strategy, and they'll have to prepare to defeat the dead the same way they've defeated everybody else. That doesn't sound like someone who's dismissed the idea closed-mindedly.

When Jamie told her Tyrion would have proof of the Army of the Dead, her reaction was one of outright disbelief to the point she almost laughed at him.

They both talk of Dany having "the numbers" they no longer have. 

Then she said, "Dead men, dragons, and Dragon Queens....." almost the same way Tyrion spoke of Grumpkins and Snarks to Jon in Season 1, then spoke about beating any "enemy" like Tywin would have... which I took to mean like the Red Wedding.... not on a battlefield, but more stealthy. 

She never mentioned specifically beating just the Army of the Dead.

Seemed clear to me she thinks Tyrion is lying and it's a trap for her instead, and a stupid one at that, that no adult would ever believe. It's probably why they gave Dany the line on the boat that she wasn't sorry she had gone to save them. She had to "see it to know." Now she "knows." 

Cersei is going to be the same. But Cersei isn't Dany. Cersei only cares for her own survival and power. She'd happily kill everyone in Westeros except Jamie, and be able to sleep even better at night, knowing no one was out to get her anymore, and not care that millions of innocents are dead. Where Dany truly cares about saving and liberating people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Theon_is_Azor said:

Except she didn't say "the dead". She said "our enemies". She said they need to be prepared to fight them the way their father would. Which is an obvious nod to the Red Wedding. 

She is going to try and spring a trap on Jon and Dany when they get to Kings Landing.

No, she does say "dead", and she doesn't say "our enemies" anywhere in the episode.

Here's the quote:

Quote

I've come to believe that an accommodation with the Dragon Queen could be in our immediate interest. She has the numbers. If we want to beat her, we have to be clever. We have to fight her like Father would have.

Dead men, dragons, and Dragon Queens… Whatever stands in our way, we will defeat it.

She's not dismissing the idea of the dead any more than she's dismissing the idea of Drogon or Dany. She knows she has to defeat them all, and is working out how to do so.

Share this post


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

Then she said, "Dead men, dragons, and Dragon Queens....." almost the same way Tyrion spoke of Grumpkins and Snarks to Jon in Season 1, 

Seriously, your argument is that she thinks dead men, dragons, and Dragon Queens are like snarks and grumpkins, right after a dragon destroyed her army and she's talking about a meeting with a Dragon Queen?

Share this post


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

Seriously, your argument is that she thinks dead men, dragons, and Dragon Queens are like snarks and grumpkins, right after a dragon destroyed her army and she's talking about a meeting with a Dragon Queen?

Seriously. Nope. Sorry I'm confusing you.

My argument is she doesn't believe the Army of the Dead is real. That's what she almost laughs at. You just went back and rewatched the scene to get the details of the dialog. Did you just listen to the audio/ read the captions or did you actually watch Lena's reaction, when Jamie told her about an army of dead men marching south? 

Share this post


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

Their reason for needing to convince her.  They should have none.  She isn't going to provide support for the effort anyway, Tyrion knows that.

The reason is they can't have one war against Cersei and kill a whole lot of fighting men when they will need them to fight the army of the dead.

Share this post


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

Of course she is.  And I reiterate, why does Tyrion feel compelled to prove anything to her.  Burn down the red keep, convince the leaderless army of the threat that looms, and go TCB.

Feel free to correct me but the prophecy was something like Dany will be betrayed once for love, once for money, and once for going to KL to talk to a psycho bitch.

Share this post


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

Seriously. Nope. Sorry I'm confusing you.

My argument is she doesn't believe the Army of the Dead is real. That's what she almost laughs at. You just went back and rewatched the scene to get the details of the dialog. Did you just listen to the audio/ read the captions or did you actually watch Lena's reaction, when Jamie told her about an army of dead men marching south? 

Actually, I just went back and copied and pasted from the closed captions. But really, the fact that everyone who disagrees is insisting that nobody ever said "dead men", she said "our enemies", and so on, makes me think they didn't even do that. Anyway, after rewatching it now:

She's holding back laughter the entire conversation. Because she already knows what Jaime is telling her—that's why she reveals that right after she finally laughs.

Meanwhile, she doesn't laugh at "an army of dead men", she laughs at the next line: "Tyrion claims he'll have proof". She's laughing at Tyrion, at the idea that he thinks his proof is at all relevant. Because whether she agrees to the armistice depends 100% on whether she thinks she can use it to her advantage. And she didn't even wait for Jaime to come to her before she started considering that, much less wait for proof.

And the last line—"dead men, dragons, and Dragon Queens"—she's not laughing there at all. Those aren't snarks and grumpkins she doesn't believe in, those are the things she's determined to defeat. She doesn't think the dead will be a problem, but that's not because she refuses to believe they exist, it's because she refuses to believe there's anything she and Jaime can't defeat.

And showing her a wight isn't going to change any of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, good girl said:

The reason is they can't have one war against Cersei and kill a whole lot of fighting men when they will need them to fight the army of the dead.

Actually taking King's Landing would mean tens of thousands dead. But just laying siege and leaving Cersei trapped inside would only mean tying up a few thousand, and they don't have to be top-quality troops. Cersei has virtually no army left that could lift the siege.

Of course if D&D want to eliminate this option, there are ways they could, in a single line by Tyrion: "Your Grace, King's Landing can be supplied entirely by sea, with no way to prevent it by land, so as long as Euron controls the seas, we can't lay siege". Fine, that's true for a few real-life cities, like Constantinople, so I'd buy it. Or, "If we lay siege, Cersei can just hire mercenaries to come lift the siege". Sure, I have no idea how effectively you can control raven communications, because nobody's ever said. In which case they're back to the other options. But so far, there's no indication that it wouldn't work.

Obviously a siege would mean miserable conditions for the people of KL, and Dany wants those people to acclaim her as Queen, so, it's not ideal. But neither is wasting men they can't afford to lose fighting Cersei while the dead move south, or leaving Cersei alone to attack them from behind while they're fighting, or dividing their army in half, or trusting Cersei to stick to a cease fire without backstabbing them, or hiring a Faceless Man to assassinate her in the middle of a guarded keep. There are no ideal choices; they have to pick the least bad. That's part of what being a Queen or a general is about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×