Why Bran as King would be a terrible idea

[Rose of Red Lake]

12 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

I didn't say Jon didn't want to do it, heck anyone in that position would have wanted too, I'm merely pointing out that he waited a whole book, and only did do it when it fell in line with his duty. While the two were conflicting he always chose his duty for all of ADWD, he only marched to meet Ramsay when it was also part of his duty

I agree, but it's probably not a good example of Jon "always doing his duty," because a real test would be something he doesn't want to do. 

I also think it was a rash decision and he was bound to lose. He doesn't understand Ramsay at all and it reminded me of Brandon Stark Goes To Meet Aerys type of Stark stupidity. Like I'd want a king who can think things through a bit more. 

[Rose of Red Lake]

26 minutes ago, frenin said:

Yet again, the whole Sansa affair reeks of D&D not Martin. Yet, once i would've said the same about Bran.

Speaking as a Sansa fan, we are a small bunch. And no Sansa fan I know of is completely on board with her never finding someone to love her beyond her claim, no matter what her ruling situation is.

In an interview, GRRM said Arya is more popular than Sansa but he thinks it will change when people see "the ending he has in store for her." Which is interesting. 

[Rose of Red Lake]

41 minutes ago, Jay21 said:

That whole scene seemed a little out of character for Jon, no?  He's been abused as a bastard his whole life and eaten it in silence but now Ramsay Snow has goaded him into a rash, rage fueled assault?  I think there's more than we're seeing from Jon here, I think he's manipulating his audience in the Shieldhall a little bit because he reads the Pink Letter a little differently than we do. 

I thought it was odd at first, but if Jon isn't destined to be king, it could be a sign of his flaws. He's very smart North of the Wall. But South of that? I don't know. I don't think he's going to be a badass in every situation. I wish Jon had tricks up his sleeve and was conniving but I think he just greatly underestimates Ramsay and traps himself in situations.

[ATaleofSalt&Onions]

1 hour ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

That's outrageous to you? I don't think it is. I can't see how we'll ever agree on anything then. 

I don't know if outrageous is the right word, ridiculous is probably how I'd describe it. If the story ended the other way around - someone from a Southern house is king in the South and then someone else from the same house is elected King in the North (not counting a scenario where Jon is KITN and some other Targ rules the other kingdoms, since that's obviously a different dynamic due to Jon's Stark heritage and upbringing), that wouldn't seem weird to you? If Bran can't even keep the North in the Seven Kingdoms I see no plausible way that Southerners would make him their king.  It's a have your cake and eat it too ending for the Starks.

[ATaleofSalt&Onions]

1 hour ago, frenin said:

That's very true.

 the whole Sansa affair reeks of D&D not Martin. Yet again, once i would've said the same about Bran.

Queen Sansa is something I could see D&D coming up with. I definitely never felt that way about Bran. If D&D were picking their own king at the end, there's no way they'd pick Bran, they didn't care about his story at all and he was by far the least popular major character among the big 3 families (Stark/Lannister/Targaryen).

[H Wadsworth Longfellow]

There are three scenarios for each to rule.  Which obviously will depend on what state the land is in.

1. The feudal system collapses and the nobles are no more.  In other words, the wildlings are the dominant group.  This is the only way for Jon Snow to rule.  Jon will not be welcomed back at the N/W.  It doesn't matter who his father is.  He can't ever prove who fathered him.  Jon looks like a Stark and acts like a Stark.  His rise to power can only happen if the system in place currently breaks and gets replaced by the free ways of the wildlings.  Which is to say the strong leads and heredity is not so important.
2. Part of the feudal system remains intact and some kind of governing system remains.  Daenerys will be able to claim her father's throne and lead the people through the darkness and then back into the light.  This is what Quaithe was saying all along.  Only if the nobility remains intact can Daenerys put forth her claim.  Otherwise she will have to rebuild a new Queendom from scratch.  The latter will have to wait until the land can be inhabited again. 
3. All hell has broken lose.  Governments have collapsed.  The nobles are barely surviving, same as the common folk.  They don't get the respect and have lost the privileges they once enjoyed.  The ones who can have crossed over to the East.  The ones who remained are dying and decreasing in numbers.  The wights are increasing and the white walkers have taken over.  This is where Bran could be useful because of his ability to control the skins, the wights. 

I cannot see where Bran will rule over a kingdom of Westeros.  He is an unknown and a cripple.  He has zero experience in ruling and governing.  He's a bitter little dude and that does not bode well for anybody.

[Rose of Red Lake]

1 hour ago, ATaleofSalt&Onions said:

I don't know if outrageous is the right word, ridiculous is probably how I'd describe it. If the story ended the other way around - someone from a Southern house is king in the South and then someone else from the same house is elected King in the North (not counting a scenario where Jon is KITN and some other Targ rules the other kingdoms, since that's obviously a different dynamic due to Jon's Stark heritage and upbringing), that wouldn't seem weird to you? 

I dont think this analogy works because the South is more flexible when it comes to who rules over them. They have had so many kings with Houses rising and falling over the centuries, I don't think they care much at this point and probably just want someone who won't bring endless war. Dorne, North, and Iron Islands are more particular. But if they don't want to unify, so what. Let people decide if they want. That wouldn't be proof of Bran's "failures." It would be progress. 

Starks are not foreigners to the rest of Westeros. Robb ruled in the South in the Riverlands and their father ruled in KL. Bran's cousin would be Lord of the Vale. He will probably ally with Sam and Tyrion who can vouch for him with people in the Westerlands and the Reach. Stormlands will remember Jon and Ned's support to Stannis and Robert, respectively. 

What would seem weird to me is, if after the nukeocaplyse with dragons/wildfire, people will suddenly balk at a disabled kid from the North. Like really their cities are utterly destroyed but this Northern heir who had nothing to do with it, is the last straw? 

[ATaleofSalt&Onions]

6 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

I dont think this analogy works because the South is more flexible when it comes to who rules over them. They have had so many kings with Houses rising and falling over the centuries 

I honestly don't know what you're talking about here. The Lannisters, Gardeners, Durrandons, and Arryns all ruled their regions for thousands of years pre-Conquest. The Martells have ruled Dorne since Nymeria's invasion. The Riverlands were basically the only region that didn't have stable rule as they got conquered a lot. Since Aegon's Conquest, all the kingdoms, including the North, were under Targaryen rule (except for Dorne for the first half) and then under Robert.

 

8 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

I don't think they care much at this point and probably just want someone who won't bring endless war.

And why would that be Bran? Any reason why you'd make Bran king would apply even more to the North. The idea that we're supposed to believe the Southerners set aside everything else to make Bran their king, while the North holds on to petty parochialism and rejects him just because he rules the other kingdoms makes no sense.

11 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Starks are not foreigners to the rest of Westeros. Robb ruled in the South in the Riverlands and their father ruled in KL. Bran's cousin would be Lord of the Vale.

If the North becomes a separate, independent country, then Bran is literally a foreign king within the Six Kingdoms. The Riverlands accepted Robb because he had Tully blood, and Bran does too, but that doesn't apply to any of the other realms. Edmure Tully has these same relations, why not make him king? 

13 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

He will probably ally with Sam and Tyrion who can vouch for him with people in the Westerlands and the Reach.

Why would anyone in the Reach or Westerlands care what Sam or Tyrion think?

 

14 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Stormlands will remember Jon and Ned's support to Stannis and Robert, respectively. 

That's no reason to make Ned's second son who thus far has had essentially no interaction with anyone outside the North king.

15 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

What would seem weird to me is, if after the nukeocaplyse with dragons/wildfire, people will suddenly balk at a disabled kid from the North. Like really their cities are utterly destroyed but this Northern heir is the last straw? 

I think that's putting the cart before the horse. Why would Bran be in any sort of position to be a candidate for king in the first place? I could substitute a multitude of other characters in Bran's place and ask that same question, and it would make far more sense as to how that character would be in a position to become King of Westeros. And your logic here applies even more to the North. They're facing a zombie apocalypse but afterwards their big concern is going to be rejecting Ned Stark's eldest surviving son so they don't have to be tied to the other kingdoms?

As Ned's heir, Bran has a very straightforward path to ruling the North, while has no claim in the South and thus far has done nothing to have any support there for becoming king. An ending where he's KITN while the other kingdoms are ruled by some other person/house is very easy to believe. An ending where he rules every kingdom except the North does not make sense. 

[Rose of Red Lake]

51 minutes ago, ATaleofSalt&Onions said:

I honestly don't know what you're talking about here. The Lannisters, Gardeners, Durrandons, and Arryns all ruled their regions for thousands of years pre-Conquest. The Martells have ruled Dorne since Nymeria's invasion. The Riverlands were basically the only region that didn't have stable rule as they got conquered a lot. Since Aegon's Conquest, all the kingdoms, including the North, were under Targaryen rule (except for Dorne for the first half) and then under Robert.

I didn't include Dorne in that assessment. And if the other kingdoms can switch between at least three houses over time as their overlords, that's believable enough to see them going along with another overlord from somewhere else. 

51 minutes ago, ATaleofSalt&Onions said:

I think that's putting the cart before the horse. Why would Bran be in any sort of position to be a candidate for king in the first place? I could substitute a multitude of other characters in Bran's place and ask that same question, and it would make far more sense as to how that character would be in a position to become King of Westeros. And your logic here applies even more to the North. They're facing a zombie apocalypse but afterwards their big concern is going to be rejecting Ned Stark's eldest surviving son so they don't have to be tied to the other kingdoms?

If the whole story is about knowing your history so you don't repeat it, Bran makes sense. He's also being trained by a former Hand of KL (Bloodraven) and will probably have Sam and Tyrion as advisors, also history masters. Sam and Tyrion could be elected but Sam would refuse and Tyrion is too despised to be a figurehead. 

Quote

And your logic here applies even more to the North. They're facing a zombie apocalypse but afterwards their big concern is going to be rejecting Ned Stark's eldest surviving son so they don't have to be tied to the other kingdoms?

Northern Independence is actually important to people in the North. Where is the basis for Westerland independence, for example? There's nothing there. Meanwhile, Northern Independence is baked into the plot from Book 1.

If the lords want to elect a King in the North with that specific role/ title whose only focus is the North, that can't be Bran if he's occupied with something else. So that must mean...

[sweetsunray]

3 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

I thought it was odd at first, but if Jon isn't destined to be king, it could be a sign of his flaws. He's very smart North of the Wall. But South of that? I don't know. I don't think he's going to be a badass in every situation. I wish Jon had tricks up his sleeve and was conniving but I think he just greatly underestimates Ramsay and traps himself in situations.

I think it's because George prefers Strider over Aragorn, like I do.

[Lady Topspin]

A King Bran is a terrible idea.  The kid is a voyeur who hides in the dark.  I guess he can rule from that cave.  The roots are his throne and his subjects will the the Others and the Ice wights. He won't be the king of the living. 

[The Sleeper]

1. Bran actually has a rulership arc mid Game of Thrones and up to end of Clash of Kings. He is acting Lord of Winterfell and though the role is largely ceremonial he does perform these duties while also watching Lewyn and Cassel do the actual governing, which is much like the apprenticeship heirs go through. On a final note he accepts the fealty of the Reeds and surrenders the people of Winterfell to Theon, both acts of ruler. 
2. All visible symbols of rulership in the North are primarily associated with Bran from the beginning. He drinks from his father's cup, he sits in his father's chair. Winterfell is described as his and he is the  who knows all its secrets. The very first chapter which is entirely about being a Lord in the North is told from his perspective and in the end he is the only Stark to receive his direwolf, a living symbol of the Starks on page by Jon. In his last chapter in Clash he is likened to Winterfell itself.
3. Legally speaking he is Robb's heir and since the latter is dead, Bran is the Lord of Winterfell and King in the North. And yes there lots of people in the North who would make good on that and probably quite a few in the Riverlands. 
4. He has superpowers. He can watch anything, anyone and anytime, he has access to the knowledge accumulated in the weirwoods since the beginning of time, or whenever they first sprung, he can talk to people from a distance and take a stroll in other people's bodies. His abilities and their religious connotations more than compensate for any physical frailty or his age. He has the potential to be more than a lord to the northmen. He can be their god. 

So all together, I think a kingdom of savage, fanatical northmen led by their omniscient shaman-King rising to prominence by the end of the series has been pretty thoroughly set up in the books. 

And yes, I agree it isn't necessarily a happy ending as it involves a regime based on religious terror and fanaticism, blood sacrifice, universal surveillance and mind control. 

[Fool Stands On Giant’s Toe]

I love the way the TV show. 
Recast Daario just as the book did. 

I love the way the TV show raised Jon and viewers report seeing that it was the Red priest.

I love the way they showed fake Jamie at table with Brienne.

I love the way Tormand says, No I saw him riding that thing!

I loved the way they showed fake Jon limping 

I loved watching Sansa give the order to Brienne to have Jon Assassinated.

I really loved, “I’m not Bran anymore. Not Really”

I loved watching all the cotf? seduce men and fail at the Hound.

I really really loved when the Hound grabs Arya and asks her to look at him. Brilliant moment.

I love/hated watching that Bran get Theon killed so the Night King was killable 

I love the moment when the Night King realized that what sat in front of him was  not an ally in need

I loved how they showed us this was the end of TWoW and the beginning of Spring so they could do another season later but to much hate has canceled 4 out of 5 pilots so probably never get done.

Overall the show skipped to much and rushed an ending to keep a lid on the book’s surprises and magic.

I love the hate I’ll get for this post the mostest 

[Alyn Oakenfist]

10 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

I agree, but it's probably not a good example of Jon "always doing his duty," because a real test would be something he doesn't want to do. 

I also think it was a rash decision and he was bound to lose. He doesn't understand Ramsay at all and it reminded me of Brandon Stark Goes To Meet Aerys type of Stark stupidity. Like I'd want a king who can think things through a bit more. 

Oh I agree with you, I'm merely saying it's not the big "Jon betrayed everything" shit people it out to be.

 

[MissM]

14 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Speaking as a Sansa fan, we are a small bunch. And no Sansa fan I know of is completely on board with her never finding someone to love her beyond her claim, no matter what her ruling situation is.

In an interview, GRRM said Arya is more popular than Sansa but he thinks it will change when people see "the ending he has in store for her." Which is interesting. 

Source?

[Rose of Red Lake]

41 minutes ago, MissM said:

Source?

Chicago Humanities festival. It is a bit of a rambling answer, if I recall.

5 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Oh I agree with you, I'm merely saying it's not the big "Jon betrayed everything" shit people it out to be.

I am definitely not one of those people. I liked Jon's idea just not the execution.

[MissM]

13 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Chicago Humanities festival. It is a bit of a rambling answer, if I recall.

 

Yes it was a long answer and I remember this interview but I didn't get the same impression as you. 

The question was about posed as Sansa have a soft power which is opposite to the way he is writing Arya. He goes on to talk about his female character and so on and so forth. He wants to show a deeper aspects to his female characters and explore their complexity which all his female characters have.

"Arya is certainly more popular than Sansa. Sansa has her people who love her too. Of course we'll have to see when I write the book the end that I have in mind for both of them." - George R R Martin, that's how he ended his long winded answer. 

 

 

[Alyn Oakenfist]

1 hour ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

I am definitely not one of those people. I liked Jon's idea just not the execution.

Yes, Jon at the Shield Hall is the climax of Every. Single. Leadership. Mistake. He did in ADWD. Bit contrived for story purposes but what you gonna do. It isn't him betraying his duty, it's him being completely shit at explaining what his duty actually is, as per usual in ADWD I might add.

[Rose of Red Lake]

1 hour ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Yes, Jon at the Shield Hall is the climax of Every. Single. Leadership. Mistake. He did in ADWD. Bit contrived for story purposes but what you gonna do. It isn't him betraying his duty, it's him being completely shit at explaining what his duty actually is, as per usual in ADWD I might add.

Flip the narrative. Jon could have explained that the Boltons betrayed their stewardship of the North by not supporting their critical defenses. Declare a state of emergency, that everyone in the North is now a member of the Watch, gather evidence to show that the Boltons have not helped the Watch, and brand anyone who does not defend the realm a deserter. Gather intel on Ramsay so you know your enemy (if he would just wait a second, Jeyne would show up to give him more details on that). Be more discreet. Don't go off into the woods looking for Ramsay, he'll probably outsmart you because he's a ruthless psycho. I know Jon said he was riding to Winterfell in public but in private we see he's trying to find Ramsay, so good fake out...but he is still underprepared IMO.

[Alyn Oakenfist]

1 minute ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Flip the narrative. Jon could have explained that the Boltons betrayed their stewardship of the North by not supporting their critical defenses. Declare everyone in the North members of the Watch, gather evidence to show that the Boltons have not helped the Watch, and brand anyone who does not defend the realm a deserter. Gather intel on Ramsay so you know your enemy (if he would just wait a second, Jeyne would show up to give him more details on that). Be more discreet. Don't go off into the woods looking for Ramsay, he'll probably outsmart you because he's a ruthless psycho. I know Jon said he was riding to Winterfell in public but in private we see he's trying to find Ramsay, so good fake out...but he is still underprepared IMO.

Yeah, Jon's biggest problem in ADWD is that he expects people to follow him without fully understanding him, and in crisis situations that is the normal, but when there is no battle or immediate danger (relatively speaking) then he should fucking explain everything. It wouldn't been that hard for him to say, "well Ramsay Bolton is coming to end us all, we need to defend ourselves".