House of the Dragon Flood Gates Open

[C.T. Phipps]

HBO's biggest issue was that they wanted more Game of Thrones and the creators wanted to move on (I bet they regret that). This is a chance to re-bottle the magic and they very much are willing to continue to bet on House Martin, First and Last of his Name. However, Season 8 is up there with Mass Effect 3 and Dexter for infamous endings so I think they're preparing very much for the revival to go full steam ahead but are keeping some caution.

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

6 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

This is a chance to re-bottle the magic and they very much are willing to continue to bet on House Martin, First and Last of his Name.

The biggest question is whether it's possible to recapture the magic in the first place. GoT was very much a case of lightning in a bottle.

[C.T. Phipps]

39 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

The biggest question is whether it's possible to recapture the magic in the first place. GoT was very much a case of lightning in a bottle.

In terms of fandom, I'm already seeing a revival of excitement but I believe the Dance of the Dragons is by far the best of Martin's writing outside of the actual book-books with the benefit of all the twists and turns in the books as well as a clearly defined ending that will be satisfactory to all.

(Though knowing all the answers may be an impediment)

So while I wouldn't say the odds are 100%, I think it has a 75% chance of getting people back into it and it doesn't necessarily need to be a cultural phenomenon to guarantee A Song of Ice and Fire properties ongoing for the next decade to come either.

[Lady Anna]

14 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

The tweet links to the THR article, if you want to take a look. I think they were trying to say that they were going to be sensitive with how they portrayed assault, but instead it just came across like they were already trying to justify rape scenes preemptively. And like I said earlier, I don’t think HBO has earned the benefit of the doubt on this topic.

Oh I see. And agreed, I think people are right to question it.

[Lord Varys]

9 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Perhaps Mysaria was just a spurned lover, jealous that Daemon had abandoned her for Nettles. I don’t think that Nettles was his daughter because a) parent-child incest is the kind that even GRRM tends to shy away from, save for Craster, and b) if she wasn’t a dragonseed, then that means you don’t need to be Valyrian to tame a dragon. We know Jaehaerys was terrified of a dragon hatchling falling into another’s hands, which would suggest that he believed this was a real possibility.

Jaehaerys feared that other dragonlord descendants like the Volantene triarchs or whatever descendants of Valyrian nobility lived in Braavos (there were some there, too) might acquire dragons from the stolen eggs. But that is a separate issue since it was apparently deemed possible by all that dragon hatchlings might bond with whoever raises them. That's even part of the rationale behind Daenerys offering a dragon to the Astapori - she gives the impression she thinks they can control Drogon, and the Astapori believe that, too. We also see Rhaena and the Lannisters think that, while Rhaena is at Casterly Rock with Dreamfyre and some dragon eggs.

That is different from the issue of mounting an adult dragon. The Targaryens apparently jealously guarded the dragon eggs, and Jaehaerys also didn't allow all his children access to the Dragonpit, but on Dragonstone the riderless and wild dragons were not exactly well-protected against 'dragon theft'.

But regarding Daemon-Nettles you don't have to assume an incestuous relationship if they are father and daughter. In fact, if they are father and daughter then you can explain all the signs pointing towards a romance by ways of their father-daughter bond. Some people have trouble with them sharing a bathtub, but Dunk & Egg do this, too, so this doesn't have to indicate a sexual relationship.

It also strikes me as more likely that Daemon would send his daughter away than that he would part with his lover. If Nettles was his lover they could have run away together, building a new life of their own in Essos or wherever else they would fly. But if she was his daughter then his bigger priority might have been to protect her.

There is no chance to say or even assume that the Driftmark-born Nettles is less of a dragonseed than Hugh and Ulf or Addam of Hull. Corlys' last Targaryen descendants would have been his great-great-great-grandmother - and that only if the first Daemon Velaryon and Valaena Velaryon were siblings.

That Hugh's and Ulf's Targaryen ancestry isn't recorded could also indicate that their links to the dragon family tree are very obscure. Although, of course, both could even be the unacknowledged sons or grandsons of Aemon or Baelon Targaryen.

Nettles doesn't do anything different than the other dragonriders. The only thing different there is that Sheepstealer is a wild dragon who doesn't tolerate humans in his presence until Nettles changes that slowly with her feeding routine. But the idea that she would have even tried to mount a dragon with her background - born the child of a dockside whore - if she didn't believe she was a Targaryen descendant is not very likely. She even took it upon herself to travel from Driftmark to Dragonstone and then searched out Sheepstealer.

Her later behavior also makes it clear that she didn't have a cruel streak nor any political ambition. So the best guess there would have been that her mother had told her that Prince Daemon was her father and she ended up doing that to prove to him that she was truly his child. Sort of like how Obara 'proved' that she was Oberyn's child by taking up the spear (although I'm sure Daemon never went to Nettles or her mother to claim Nettles as his child - she would have heard about Jace's call and decided that this was her chance to prove to her father who she were).

9 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I hadn’t realized that Ulf and Hugh rode Jaehaerys and Alysanne’s dragons. If that’s not symbolism, then I don’t know what is.

Not sure what you mean there. It could have symbolized that it doesn't matter who writes a dragon ... but both their fates prove that it very much matters who a dragonrider is and what his social background is.

It does have an ugly symbolism insofar as the dragons of the king and queen who cared the most about their people ... ended up causing their subjects the most grief.

9 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Since Jace persuaded his mother to make Addam heir to Driftmark rather than he or his brother, is that indication that he figured Laenor really wasn’t his father?

Not necessarily. If you check George's SSM on succession laws and stuff it is not clear where in the line of succession a legitimized bastard would fit. Addam and Alyn both are older than Joffrey Velaryon, meaning Jace/Corlys/Rhaenyra could have been of the opinion that the Hull boys have a better claim to Driftmark now than Joff.

If Robb's last will includes a legitimization decree of Jon Snow as Jon Stark then this could have a similar effect, meaning folks now think that Jon Stark comes before Ned's younger children Brandon, Rickon, Sansa, and Arya ... independently of Robb's own ruling on his succession in the last will.

(Of course, the Jon situation is complicated by the fact that he took the black.)

9 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

It should be noted that Nettles used animal husbandry that no other Targaryen did to tame the Sheepstealer. So, yes, I wouldn't be surprised if she was not his daughter.

She just used animal husbandry to get close to Sheepstealer ... the process of mounting the dragon doesn't seem different from other mountings, be they done by Targaryens or the other dragonseeds.

We could make a case that Nettles may have had no dragonlord blood if she was Driftmarkian by birth - but she was, just as the Hull boys were, and Ulf and Hugh are Dragonstonians.

9 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I also see Mysaria simply being angry at Daemon abandoning her. The Shae parallels are great with her taking a position in Rhaenyra's court.

The whole dynamic there is just weird. So Rhaenyra accepts Mysaria as Daemon's mistress and even keeps her as informal Mistress of Whisperers but she cannot suffer the idea that Daemon is fucking Nettles? That's just weird as hell and needs some explanation.

And Mysaria being still very much in love with Daemon is also weird as hell. The guy had lived with Rhaenyra on Dragonstone for ten years now ... and prior to that he was with Laena in Essos and at Driftmark for five years. Prior to that mostly on the Stepstones (where Mysaria could have joined him, I guess, but that's not mentioned in the text).

Whatever they have or rekindle during the Dance seems to be more like the bond of old lovers who still have casual sex ... but no deep romantic bond.

In that sense I really can't see Mysaria's jealousy being about Daemon fucking some bastard girl. It would make more sense if she felt betrayed that he treats this girl much better than the child they nearly had once. Keep in mind that Viserys I commanded Daemon to return the dragon egg he had given Mysaria for their child and that he demanded they separate ... and Daemon obeyed, forcing Mysaria to return to Lys on a ship and she lost the child during the voyage.

If the aging Daemon decided to defy convention and good taste and openly stand by and accept his daughter never mind what Rhaenyra or the court said ... then this could have something that Mysaria took not exactly kindly too.

[The Bard of Banefort]

It’s symbolic because J/A were considered the greatest king and queen in Westeros, and the kingdom prospered under them. Much like how FnB calls the Dance “The Dying of the Dragons,” their dragons being claimed by two oathbreakers who led the most savage attack in the war symbolizes how this golden era was corrupted, and now heralded the beginning of the end for the Targaryens.

[dsjj251]

On 7/20/2022 at 3:51 AM, The Wondering Wolf said:

 

Aemma is always styled 'lady' in the books, which makes sense. Laena and Laenor weren't princes either.

Both Laena and Laenor are styled as Princess/Prince in the first couple of prints of TWOIAF and The Princess and the Queen. 

 

It isnt until Fire and Blood that we get the canonical rewrite 
 

[The Wondering Wolf]

3 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

Both Laena and Laenor are styled as Princess/Prince in the first couple of prints of TWOIAF and The Princess and the Queen. 

 

It isnt until Fire and Blood that we get the canonical rewrite 
 

I don't think TPATQ calls them prince oder princess, at least I didn't find any mention. Laenor is always styled ser and Laena lady. So there wasn't a retcon but the correction of an error in the Worldbook.

[C.T. Phipps]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The whole dynamic there is just weird. So Rhaenyra accepts Mysaria as Daemon's mistress and even keeps her as informal Mistress of Whisperers but she cannot suffer the idea that Daemon is fucking Nettles? That's just weird as hell and needs some explanation.

And Mysaria being still very much in love with Daemon is also weird as hell. The guy had lived with Rhaenyra on Dragonstone for ten years now ... and prior to that he was with Laena in Essos and at Driftmark for five years. Prior to that mostly on the Stepstones (where Mysaria could have joined him, I guess, but that's not mentioned in the text).

Whatever they have or rekindle during the Dance seems to be more like the bond of old lovers who still have casual sex ... but no deep romantic bond.

In that sense I really can't see Mysaria's jealousy being about Daemon fucking some bastard girl. It would make more sense if she felt betrayed that he treats this girl much better than the child they nearly had once. Keep in mind that Viserys I commanded Daemon to return the dragon egg he had given Mysaria for their child and that he demanded they separate ... and Daemon obeyed, forcing Mysaria to return to Lys on a ship and she lost the child during the voyage.

If the aging Daemon decided to defy convention and good taste and openly stand by and accept his daughter never mind what Rhaenyra or the court said ... then this could have something that Mysaria took not exactly kindly too.

I mean, there's an Occam's Razor answer that Rhaenyra and Mysaria's motives don't actually have to be anything than what it appears to be: prickled pride. Their hatred for Nettles is due to the fact she's a younger dragon rider that Daeron is paying a great deal of attention to and that feeds into both of their egos. Rhaenyra's Cersei like qualities are her declining appearance and paranoia [about bastards in particular] that more or less completely destroys her reign by driving away Corlys as well as driving her husband to suicide by battle charge.

When Rhaenyra got involved with Daemon, Mysaria was part of the package as well.

It doesn't make sense and seems stupid because, whatever their motivations were, it probably wasn't to alienate Daemon so much that it drove him to his death.

Part of what makes Martin's writing "believable" is people do immensely stupid things in RL they'd never do in fiction because fiction has to make sense and Martin lets them in his work. Things like Alicent being unable to shut up about her accusations of Rhaenyra's sons being bastards.

[SeanF]

31 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I mean, there's an Occam's Razor answer that Rhaenyra and Mysaria's motives don't actually have to be anything than what it appears to be: prickled pride. Their hatred for Nettles is due to the fact she's a younger dragon rider that Daeron is paying a great deal of attention to and that feeds into both of their egos. Rhaenyra's Cersei like qualities are her declining appearance and paranoia [about bastards in particular] that more or less completely destroys her reign by driving away Corlys as well as driving her husband to suicide by battle charge.

When Rhaenyra got involved with Daemon, Mysaria was part of the package as well.

It doesn't make sense and seems stupid because, whatever their motivations were, it probably wasn't to alienate Daemon so much that it drove him to his death.

Part of what makes Martin's writing "believable" is people do immensely stupid things in RL they'd never do in fiction because fiction has to make sense and Martin lets them in his work. Things like Alicent being unable to shut up about her accusations of Rhaenyra's sons being bastards.

Fair points.  Every main character in ASOIAF does at least one thing that is   jaw-droppingly stupid.  As people do.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

It’s symbolic because J/A were considered the greatest king and queen in Westeros, and the kingdom prospered under them. Much like how FnB calls the Dance “The Dying of the Dragons,” their dragons being claimed by two oathbreakers who led the most savage attack in the war symbolizes how this golden era was corrupted, and now heralded the beginning of the end for the Targaryens.

I don't think the narrative that the death of the dragons was 'the beginning of the end' has much merit. I mean, the dragons clearly weren't *that important*, after all, since nothing indicates the dragonriders were more powerful or more prestigious than the later Targaryens.

But it certainly adds a rather ugly spin to the whole exceptionalism thing. Although I actually don't think Hugh and Ulf are deserving of their ill reputation. They didn't do anything than Jaehaerys and his sons during the Fourth Dornish War or the Conqueror at Harrenhal. But their background branded them scum, which in turn proves that dragons aren't power after all. At least not enough power to overcome a cabal of scheming princes and lords.

One wonders whether Tyrion as a dragonrider might not be more akin to the likes of Hugh than a proper Targaryen. It won't make him look better, nor is it going to make the stain of the kinslayer and kingslayer go away.

25 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I mean, there's an Occam's Razor answer that Rhaenyra and Mysaria's motives don't actually have to be anything than what it appears to be: prickled pride. Their hatred for Nettles is due to the fact she's a younger dragon rider that Daeron is paying a great deal of attention to and that feeds into both of their egos. Rhaenyra's Cersei like qualities are her declining appearance and paranoia [about bastards in particular] that more or less completely destroys her reign by driving away Corlys as well as driving her husband to suicide by battle charge.

Rhaenyra is not paranoid about bastards. Her council and advisers are. They push her to arrest Nettles and Addam because in the wake of the treason of the Two Betrayers they are not to be trusted. Rhaenyra earlier legitimized Addam and Alyn, she had no general problem with bastards.

She ends up working herself into a frenzy over Nettles but only after Mysaria poisons her mind against her.

In context one wonders how exactly Mysaria would have gotten jealous of Nettles. The narrative has them growing close at Maidenpool. Mysaria certainly could have had spies there ... but her claim that Nettles is already carrying Daemon's child seems to be clearly false, so I'm not buying that jealousy of another lover is her motivation there.

25 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

It doesn't make sense and seems stupid because, whatever their motivations were, it probably wasn't to alienate Daemon so much that it drove him to his death.

That would mean she could accurately foresee that he would throw away his life in a pointless dragon battle ... and I don't think anyone could have foreseen that.

I mean, Daemon and Nettles could have both defected to the Greens. Or they could have turned their dragons against Rhaenyra to seize power in KL.

25 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Part of what makes Martin's writing "believable" is people do immensely stupid things in RL they'd never do in fiction because fiction has to make sense and Martin lets them in his work. Things like Alicent being unable to shut up about her accusations of Rhaenyra's sons being bastards.

Well, that wasn't that stupid, since Rhaenyra apparently didn't rip out her tongue nor send her to a brothel.

The Dance has a lot of silly things that really make no sense. Why was Dalton Greyjoy better prepared for a civil war than Rhaenyra and Daemon? Why does nobody torch Storm's End after Luke's death? Does it make sense that Daemon is still popular in the City Watch after he served literally only a couple of months two times (more than) twenty years ago? Why doesn't Rhaenyra execute Alicent, Helaena, and others? Why does she leave Alicent and Tyland and Corlys behind when she flees the city?

[The Bard of Banefort]

31 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I don't think the narrative that the death of the dragons was 'the beginning of the end' has much merit. I mean, the dragons clearly weren't *that important*, after all, since nothing indicates the dragonriders were more powerful or more prestigious than the later Targaryens.

But it certainly adds a rather ugly spin to the whole exceptionalism thing. Although I actually don't think Hugh and Ulf are deserving of their ill reputation. They didn't do anything than Jaehaerys and his sons during the Fourth Dornish War or the Conqueror at Harrenhal. But their background branded them scum, which in turn proves that dragons aren't power after all. At least not enough power to overcome a cabal of scheming princes and lords.

One wonders whether Tyrion as a dragonrider might not be more akin to the likes of Hugh than a proper Targaryen. It won't make him look better, nor is it going to make the stain of the kinslayer and kingslayer go away.

Rhaenyra is not paranoid about bastards. Her council and advisers are. They push her to arrest Nettles and Addam because in the wake of the treason of the Two Betrayers they are not to be trusted. Rhaenyra earlier legitimized Addam and Alyn, she had no general problem with bastards.

She ends up working herself into a frenzy over Nettles but only after Mysaria poisons her mind against her.

In context one wonders how exactly Mysaria would have gotten jealous of Nettles. The narrative has them growing close at Maidenpool. Mysaria certainly could have had spies there ... but her claim that Nettles is already carrying Daemon's child seems to be clearly false, so I'm not buying that jealousy of another lover is her motivation there.

That would mean she could accurately foresee that he would throw away his life in a pointless dragon battle ... and I don't think anyone could have foreseen that.

I mean, Daemon and Nettles could have both defected to the Greens. Or they could have turned their dragons against Rhaenyra to seize power in KL.

Well, that wasn't that stupid, since Rhaenyra apparently didn't rip out her tongue nor send her to a brothel.

The Dance has a lot of silly things that really make no sense. Why was Dalton Greyjoy better prepared for a civil war than Rhaenyra and Daemon? Why does nobody torch Storm's End after Luke's death? Does it make sense that Daemon is still popular in the City Watch after he served literally only a couple of months two times (more than) twenty years ago? Why doesn't Rhaenyra execute Alicent, Helaena, and others? Why does she leave Alicent and Tyland and Corlys behind when she flees the city?

Well, we’re told that Hugh was a serial rapist, so there’s that.

[Lord Varys]

3 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Well, we’re told that Hugh was a serial rapist, so there’s that.

Yes, of course, but how he is he different from the noble scum who first instigated his and Ulf's betrayal, acted pretty much as vile as they did, and then betrayed them in turn?

[C.T. Phipps]

Quote

I mean, Daemon and Nettles could have both defected to the Greens. Or they could have turned their dragons against Rhaenyra to seize power in KL.

Aegon III was unlikely to be forgiving of the murderer of his mother and the same could certainly be said of Aegon II to the man behind Blood and Cheese. Nevermind that Daemon would be betraying his own legitimate children.

Quote

But it certainly adds a rather ugly spin to the whole exceptionalism thing. Although I actually don't think Hugh and Ulf are deserving of their ill reputation. They didn't do anything than Jaehaerys and his sons during the Fourth Dornish War or the Conqueror at Harrenhal. But their background branded them scum, which in turn proves that dragons aren't power after all. At least not enough power to overcome a cabal of scheming princes and lords.

This seems to be a rather overly forgiving view of their actions that are not just treacherous and opportunistic but also bluntly stupid. They were raised to considerable status and power, only to turn cloak. Which is fine, but then they declared themselves monarchs to the side they were attempting to defect to.

[Lord Varys]

18 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Aegon III was unlikely to be forgiving of the murderer of his mother and the same could certainly be said of Aegon II to the man behind Blood and Cheese. Nevermind that Daemon would be betraying his own legitimate children.

Aegon II was MIA ... and two dragons could have easily washed out earlier crimes. And nobody talked about murdering Rhaenyra. The woman could just be confined to a tower cell. Not all coups must be bloody.

18 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

This seems to be a rather overly forgiving view of their actions that are not just treacherous and opportunistic but also bluntly stupid. They were raised to considerable status and power, only to turn cloak. Which is fine, but then they declared themselves monarchs to the side they were attempting to defect to.

The side they joined lacked viable pretenders. Aegon II was presumed dead, Aemond was eventually dead, and Daeron wasn't kingly material ... and eventually dead, too. If dragons were truly power then they should have had more support than they actually got.

[C.T. Phipps]

4 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Aegon II was MIA ... and two dragons could have easily washed out earlier crimes. And nobody talked about murdering Rhaenyra. The woman could just be confined to a tower cell. Not all coups must be bloody.

The side they joined lacked viable pretenders. Aegon II was presumed dead, Aemond was eventually dead, and Daeron wasn't kingly material ... and eventually dead, too. If dragons were truly power then they should have had more support than they actually got.

1. Frankly if you believe they're pragmatic to ignore their own family being murdered, I would argue you don't understand the character of either monarch or their supporters.

2. And Rhaenyra WAS murdered.

3. Which goes to show that they weren't truly power, just an exception tool to it. Certainly, not enough to take over the seven kingdoms by themselves.

[The Bard of Banefort]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Yes, of course, but how he is he different from the noble scum who first instigated his and Ulf's betrayal, acted pretty much as vile as they did, and then betrayed them in turn?

You compared them to Jaehaerys, Aemon, and Baelon, who didn’t torment women and smallfolk.

[C.T. Phipps]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

That would mean she could accurately foresee that he would throw away his life in a pointless dragon battle ... and I don't think anyone could have foreseen that.

Is it? Surely both of the women had to have believed that murdering Nettles would alienate Daemon. If they really did believe she was his mistress and pregnant with his child, then that is the kind of unforgivable evil thing that leads to suicide or treason. They may not have joined the Greens but certainly Daemon could have made his own claim to the throne on his children's behalf.

Killing your associate's unborn child (who doesn't exist but assuming this is their rationale) is certainly a, "this is the end of our relationship" moment. It's just both women seem to have WILDLY misjudged Daemon. Almost anyone else with a normal sense of proportion would have realized it was a horrific severing of their bonds, though.

Quote

The Dance has a lot of silly things that really make no sense. Why was Dalton Greyjoy better prepared for a civil war than Rhaenyra and Daemon? Why does nobody torch Storm's End after Luke's death? Does it make sense that Daemon is still popular in the City Watch after he served literally only a couple of months two times (more than) twenty years ago? Why doesn't Rhaenyra execute Alicent, Helaena, and others?

I think all of history and war makes no sense if you expect practical decisions but at least some of these are easy to think of.

1. The Iron Islands are always prepared for CIvil War while no one actually thought it would be unnegotiable until the unexpected and irrational kinslaying at Storm's End.

2. Torching a seat of kings and lords in Westeros is not done, especially if you want to claim it later. It requires a lunatic like Ramsay to destroy something as historic as Winterfell.

3. It doesn't surprise me that all of the Goldcloaks are Daemons' creatures if he handled their appointments and institutional inertia.

4. Rhaenyra says why she didn't kill Alicent, because her father loved her.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

You compared them to Jaehaerys, Aemon, and Baelon, who didn’t torment women and smallfolk.

That is true ... but Jaehaerys and his sons burned thousands of people alive on those ships. And it doesn't seem as if the Two Betrayers are particularly reviled because of their conduct in Tumbleton ... but because of their betrayal and burning of the town.

2 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Is it? Surely both of the women had to have believed that murdering Nettles would alienate Daemon. If they really did believe she was his mistress and pregnant with his child, then that is the kind of unforgivable evil thing that leads to suicide or treason. They may not have joined the Greens but certainly Daemon could have made his own claim to the throne on his children's behalf.

It seems pretty clear that Rhaenyra at least didn't think that, since she gave specific instruction not to harm Daemon and send him back to court because she had urgent need of him. She apparently thought that he wouldn't care about Nettles at all once she was a cold corpse.

Daemon could have also seized power as regent of his son Aegon, of course, but he could just as well done so in the name of his wife. At least he could have tried.

2 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

1. The Iron Islands are always prepared for CIvil War while no one actually thought it would be unnegotiable until the unexpected and irrational kinslaying at Storm's End.

Nope, Dalton Greyjoy specifically prepared for a civil war, buildling more and more warships during the last years of Viserys I. He foresaw a succession Rhaenyra and Daemon didn't do anything to prepare for. If they had prepared for a war, they wouldn't have been forced to look for allies at the beginning of the war. They would have just needed to send out ravens telling their friends that the time had come to fight.

2 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

2. Torching a seat of kings and lords in Westeros is not done, especially if you want to claim it later. It requires a lunatic like Ramsay to destroy something as historic as Winterfell.

In context it strikes me as pretty, well, forgiving that they didn't torch the place, nor that the Blacks never used their advantage in dragons to threaten key castles and cities of their enemies. Lannisport, Oldtown, and Storm's End couldn't go anywhere. The Greens couldn't really afford to take their dragons across Westeros to attack Black strongholds ... but the Blacks could have done that throughout most of the war.

The way to force Ormund Hightower into submission wouldn't have been to await his forces at Tumbleton ... but a message that if the army weren't to be disbanded immediately Oldtown and all the lands and ships and towns and villages of House Hightower would burn.

2 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

3. It doesn't surprise me that all of the Goldcloaks are Daemons' creatures if he handled their appointments and institutional inertia.

Yes. For a short time in 104-105 AC and then again a couple of months in 111 AC. That was nearly twenty years ago in 130 AC when Rhaenyra and Daemon take KL. Do we also imagine that the City Watch of Tommen right now is still loyal to the guy who commanded them twenty years ago under Aerys II around 280 AC? How many men knowing and fighting under Daemon in 104-105 and in 111 AC would still be with the City Watch in 130 AC? Are we to imagine the City Watch is a force of greybeards? In fact, Daemon's hold over the underworld of the city also sounds like unrealistic nonsense if you think about how long he actually lived in KL - from 103-105 AC, then again for a short time in 111 AC. In the meantime he was on Dragonstone, in the Vale, on the Stepstones, and then from 115 AC onwards in Essos with Laena, and then at High Tide on Driftmark, and after he married Rhaenyra in 120 AC they lived together on Dragonstone.

While folks might still remember his name in light of the fact that he was a prince, it is very hard to swallow that he was popular or influential in the city after being absent for such a long time. After all, for most of his life Prince Daemon wasn't in favor with King Viserys I.

George could have made this make more sense if Daemon's core group of followers during the Dance were the surviving veterans of the Stepstones war. Those guys fought with him until around 115 AC, so only fifteen years prior to the Dance, and if we had gotten a line that many of them settled in KL, joining the City Watch, etc. then you would have a good basis for the later development.

But that a guy like Luthor Largent (who most likely never served with Daemon directly, or else Otto Hightower would have been a complete moron to actually make him Lord Commander) would just be loyal to Daemon because the guy gave the City Watch their golden cloaks nearly thirty years ago is, quite frankly, very weird.

2 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

4. Rhaenyra says why she didn't kill Alicent, because her father loved her.

Yes, okay, that makes sense to a point ... but it still doesn't explain why she didn't take her and the other prisoners with her when she left. Or why they weren't executed then.

[The Bard of Banefort]

Was Aegon II considered a kinslayer for feeding Rhaenyra to Sunfyre?