[Spoilers] Episode 110 Discussion

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

Apparently, every episode of HOTD has averaged 29 million viewers. Very impressive.

[BlackLightning]

21 minutes ago, DMC said:

Especially considering what Aemond did is almost equally bad PR.

What Aemond did was arguably worse.

Killing a messenger during peace talks?

[C.T. Phipps]

2 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

What Aemond did was arguably worse.

Killing a messenger during peace talks?

Killing his nephew.

Personally.

Bastard or not.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

What Aemond did was arguably worse.

Killing a messenger during peace talks?

In that society, where many if not most would probably agree with the "eye for an eye" form of justice, especially during times of war?  Yeah, maybe.

[Raksha 2014]

8 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

And Rhaenyra, and Laena, and Laenor, and his children by Laena, and Rhaenyra's children, and his children by Rhaenyra, and that's a bunch of people right there. 

Aemond, maybe cares about Helaena (I think he wants her because Aegon has her) but wants the throne for himself whereas Daemon fights to protect the claim of others. 

I have seen no evidence in the TV series that Daemon cares anything about Rhaenyra's (nominally) Velaryon boys as anything other than extensions of Rhaenyra or abstract dynastic symbols.  He doesn't care much about his own children either; there was one scene in Pentos where he actually interacted with one of his daughters.  He never comforted or interacted with Rhaena or Baela afterwards - has he said a single word to them onscreen after their mother died?  I suppose Daemon is aware that he has two young sons with Rhaenyra; but we don't see him with them or mention them either.  He will probably mention the famous "A son for a son" line in connection with obtaining vengeance for the death of Lucerys; but that seems less a measure of Daemon's personal caring for his stepson and more a measure of his commitment to the boy's mother and a mark of his anger at the insult to Rhaenyra that the Hightowers have inflicted by murdering her child.

Aemond might know that he would do a better job as ruler of Westeros than his brother (heck, I think Helaena would make a better ruler than Aegon the self-indulgent rapist); but as I recall from the book; he would never usurp the throne from Aegon.  I am not sure that Aemond is capable of loving anyone other than himself; possibly he loves his mother (at least TV-Aegon) or at least values her.

 

 

[chrisdaw]

14 hours ago, frenin said:

None of that is an impediment for the Lords tho.

I can only remember the Targaryen-Hightowers making a fuss about her being a "whore" and the Targayen-Hightower and Vaemond Velaryon complaining/caring about her children being bastards.

And dare I say that conforming to the norms and customs of her age what leads to her demise?

Had she done what Daemon asked and destroyed the Baratheons and the Lannisters and giving their seats to Ulf and Hugh, they would likely wouldn't have betrayed her.

Had she ruled in favour of the Rosby giirl when it came to succesion, she wouldn't have been expelled later and Cregan and the Riverlords would have arrived in time for her.

Honestly I can't argue the finer points because I just can't remember. But the dragonseeds one I do, she expected the realm to accept her bastard heir and children while personally committing the greatest act of discrimination against bastards in the whole series, which caused her the loss of the Velaryons which was I think crippling.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Of course they could go with all these things.  I just don't think they will because it's convoluted and makes Daemon and/or Rhaenyra look stupid.

It is a complex thing, and in the source material neither Rhaenyra nor Daemon are in KL to actually give directions to the assassins directly. Miscommunication and mistakes are bound to happen in such a scenario.

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Who said anything about F&B?

I did, because we simply cannot pretend the book actually confirms that Daemon hired Blood and Cheese to murder a son of Aegon II.

1 hour ago, DMC said:

The fact is the two key decisions of the last two episodes in the show were, in one way or another, due to a mistake or miscommunication.  Moreover, this miscommunication and "cop out" extends faking Laenor's death.  I just think viewers will get frustrated if they keep going to the same well.  And not just book fans - I've seen mainstream reviews of the finale already question this pattern.

The Laenor thing is a clear change, since the guy's corpse was clearly not burned when Qarl stabbed him at that fair.

1 hour ago, DMC said:

I wouldn't say he has an "interest" in it, no.  But he's certainly not above it.  As for bad PR, I don't think Daemon would care at this point.  Especially considering what Aemond did is almost equally bad PR.

Them taking out Aemond in turn would mean justified revenge. Nobody could argue with that, not even the Green loyalists.

Daemon sits on his hands for pretty much the entire first year of the war, taking KL with a ruse. If he was kind of a loose cannon over the Luke incident KL would just burn.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

It is a complex thing, and in the source material neither Rhaenyra nor Daemon are in KL to actually give directions to the assassins directly. Miscommunication and mistakes are bound to happen in such a scenario.

Not the target.  You're basically saying Daemon would have commissioned Mysaria to assassinate Aegon and/or Aemond, and instead she had Jaehaerys killed.  That's an obscene "miscommunication and mistake."

5 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I did, because we simply cannot pretend the book actually confirms that Daemon hired Blood and Cheese to murder a son of Aegon II.

Well, my point there was I'm not really referring to F&B, just talking about what I think will/should happen in the show.

6 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Daemon sits on his hands for pretty much the entire first year of the war, taking KL with a ruse. If he was kind of a loose cannon over the Luke incident KL would just burn.

Like I said, while the "son for a son" thing is certainly a warped sense of justice and barbarous vengeance, I definitely don't see it as indicative of being a "loose cannon" at all in terms of war strategy.  Indeed, from a strategic perspective it's a good way to inflame Aegon and/or Aemond into making a mistake.

[The Bard of Banefort]

I wonder if the reason why the showrunners cut most of Daemon’s “softer” scenes (hugging his daughters, mourning for Viserys, etc.) was because they saw the fan love online and were worried that they had given everyone the wrong impression.

My gut feeling is that next season is going to be a lot weirder than this season was. They’ll have to invent a lot of additional material (like whatever Alicent is going to do for the rest of the show) and the new stuff they’ve introduced so far has been. . . interesting, to say the least.

[Crixus]

18 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

And Rhaenyra, and Laena, and Laenor, and his children by Laena, and Rhaenyra's children, and his children by Rhaenyra, and that's a bunch of people right there. 

Aemond, maybe cares about Helaena (I think he wants her because Aegon has her) but wants the throne for himself whereas Daemon fights to protect the claim of others. 

Rhaenyra, whom he takes to a brothel and abandons when she's just a teenager, knowing she could get into all sorts of trouble in a setting that isn't just unfamiliar, but outright dangerous. Also Rhaenyra whom he chokes last episode. 

Laena, whom they show him arguing with, and whose wishes (to go back to Driftmark for the birth) he ignores callously and casually. Laena whose funeral he laughs at, and ends up in a second marriage days after. 

Laenor: not straight up murdering someone =/= 'caring about' them. Lol. What a fucking reach this is; you must've had a great stretch right here. 

His children with Laena: he outright ignores one of the twins and it's heavily implied it's because she is dragonless, which showcases his selfish and demanding nature, and we don't see him offering any comfort after their mum's death - please don't bring up a 'cut scene' in response, as it is pretty damned obvious we should base our discourse on what is present on page and screen, not what's been edited out. 

Rhaenyra's children: the tension between him and Jace is abundantly clear last episode, and he also mocks him - stellar example of 'caring'.

Aemond cares about Helaena: onscreen evidence has him defend her. Anything like 'I think he wants her because Aegon has her' is pure conjecture. 

Aemond cares about his mother, as evidenced by his interaction with her, not least when he hugs her in Driftmark after losing his eye, and comforts her by telling her he's fine and it was worth the exchange. Also evidenced by comparing his interaction with Alicent, to Aegon's interaction with her. 

In summary, your points are so clearly inaccurate and unsupported by the show's actual content, it's verging on bizarre. And to top it, you keep claiming everyone else who disagrees with you is somehow delusional or 'with their head in the sand'. It's either disingenuous in the extreme, or frankly a very strange POV devoid of logic or plain facts. And I won't even get into your inexplicable fondness for diagnosing fictional characters with mental illness, lol. 

 

 

[C.T. Phipps]

7 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I wonder if the reason why the showrunners cut most of Daemon’s “softer” scenes (hugging his daughters, mourning for Viserys, etc.) was because they saw the fan love online and were worried that they had given everyone the wrong impression.

I mean, it was really bad character building.

[butterweedstrover]

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

Rhaenyra, whom he takes to a brothel and abandons when she's just a teenager, knowing she could get into all sorts of trouble in a setting that isn't just unfamiliar, but outright dangerous. Also Rhaenyra whom he chokes last episode.  

Nothing happens in that scene because nothing was ever going to happen. Leaving her in the brothel was about his own problems, not hers. Elsewise he showers her with trinkets, endlessly indulges her, and puts her claim above his own. The sex scene on the beach wasn't just about carnality. 

As for the choking scene. Listen to what she was saying, I mean really listen to the BS she was spewing. The Greens had just stolen her throne and demanded she give up without a fight. Her father just died, Daemon is preparing a war. And she is about to throw everything away (including their lives as Daemon well knows) over a prophecy that is totally irrelevant to everything and anything (besides actually giving her reason to want the throne). 

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

Laena, whom they show him arguing with, and whose wishes (to go back to Driftmark for the birth) he ignores callously and casually. Laena whose funeral he laughs at, and ends up in a second marriage days after.  

The birth scene is meant to juxtapose Viserys and Aemma. Whereas Viserys chose the child over his wife, Daemon chose his wife over the child. A symbol of his love for her. 

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

Laenor: not straight up murdering someone =/= 'caring about' them. Lol. What a fucking reach this is; you must've had a great stretch right here.  

His war buddy on the stepstones. They were of a single mind (versus Vaemond) and helped each other win the battle. The time skips give little room to develop relationships, but him coming up with a contrived way to make sure Laenor lives shows he does not want to get him killed (and for Daemon 'killing' is the moral standard). He obviously has some feelings for the guy that he goes out of his way like this. 

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

His children with Laena: he outright ignores one of the twins and it's heavily implied it's because she is dragonless, which showcases his selfish and demanding nature, and we don't see him offering any comfort after their mum's death - please don't bring up a 'cut scene' in response, as it is pretty damned obvious we should base our discourse on what is present on page and screen, not what's been edited out.  

Not when I watched it. I absolutely saw scenes of them together. Either way, having a selfish or violent nature that is aloof doesn't mean he doesn't love others, he just has a hard time expressing himself. When push comes to shove however he puts their interests above his own. 

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

Rhaenyra's children: the tension between him and Jace is abundantly clear last episode, and he also mocks him - stellar example of 'caring'. 

That tension was between Rhaenya's authority and his. Jace was just a proxy for Rhaenyra.

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

Aemond cares about Helaena: onscreen evidence has him defend her. Anything like 'I think he wants her because Aegon has her' is pure conjecture.  

A lot of that love is pure conjecture. There is more to Daemon and Laena (like how he would rather give up all claims to power so he can live happily with her in domesticity). 

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

Aemond cares about his mother, as evidenced by his interaction with her, not least when he hugs her in Driftmark after losing his eye, and comforts her by telling her he's fine and it was worth the exchange. Also evidenced by comparing his interaction with Alicent, to Aegon's interaction with her.  

The exchange as a child was about his dedication to her cause (war). But really, what do we know about his love for her when he is the one wishing his own brother dead so that he might sit on the iron throne. Daemon puts the needs of his allies ahead of himself, Aemond just wants power for himself. The fact that Alicent would be horrified by such a thing doesn't bother him, or that her wishes are counter to that. 

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

And to top it, you keep claiming everyone else who disagrees with you is somehow delusional or 'with their head in the sand'.

In reference to people who believe Rhaenyra isn't completely white-washed, and yeah I think those people have their heads stuck in the sand. As well as people who insist Alicent is a nuanced character, those people too have their heads stuck in the sand. 

The only defense people can muster is to say "that is how they were in the book" which despite not really being much of a defense, ignores how little of these characters we had to go off of due to not understanding their motivations or culpabilities for a number of crimes.  

Or like some who say Rhaenyra and Alicent didn't have a rivalry in the book, which is just... I don't even know what to say to that. 

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

It's either disingenuous in the extreme, or frankly a very strange POV devoid of logic or plain facts. And I won't even get into your inexplicable fondness for diagnosing fictional characters with mental illness, lol. 

 

 

CHARACTER, not characters. And I made a lengthy post explaining how pointless Alicent's motivations are, if you want you can read it. Though I think you have elsewise you wouldn't mention it. 

Edited October 26, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[Khloey]

8 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I wonder if the reason why the showrunners cut most of Daemon’s “softer” scenes (hugging his daughters, mourning for Viserys, etc.) was because they saw the fan love online and were worried that they had given everyone the wrong impression.

My gut feeling is that next season is going to be a lot weirder than this season was. They’ll have to invent a lot of additional material (like whatever Alicent is going to do for the rest of the show) and the new stuff they’ve introduced so far has been. . . interesting, to say the least.

It's a bit weird but I completely understand their decision. I saw some many comments about :

- "How great is Daemon!

- Yes he's bad but he owns it, he's not a hypocrite.

- This guys doesn't give a shit about anything, he's an absolut badass and I love it..""

Blablabla, Sara Hess got a lot of hate on the internet, some even calling her names because Daemon strangling Rhaenyra was out of character for Daemon.

Show viewers can be so dump..

[The Bard of Banefort]

46 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I mean, it was really bad character building.

Sorry if you explained this already and I missed it, but what do you mean?

[Khloey]

Re : Blood & Cheese

Doesn't Blood tries to go back with Jaehearys's head to get Daemon's reward ?

I think you  @Lord Varys make very good points, but in the end, I really think Daemon will contact Mysaria and ask her to do his dirty deed. I like your argument about Mysaria wanting to show that even her can get to royal children as a revenge for what Larys did.

Daemon and Mysaria might have a scene together in season 2 and plot it together. I don't know, but if they make Blood & Cheese as another misunderstanding/accident (after Alicent/Viserys, Aemond/Lucerys), it would be too much.

[frenin]

15 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

Honestly I can't argue the finer points because I just can't remember. But the dragonseeds one I do, she expected the realm to accept her bastard heir and children while personally committing the greatest act of discrimination against bastards in the whole series, which caused her the loss of the Velaryons which was I think crippling.

Also that.

That's about the only good counsel Corlys provides her anyway.

[MisbornHeir]

I know Lady Joanna Lannister will resist against the Red Kraken's reaving from the latter half of the dance and throughout Aegon the Younger's regency, but did the Lannisters have a noteworthy navy at onset of the Dance as mentioned in Ep 9/10?

[frenin]

42 minutes ago, MisbornHeir said:

I know Lady Joanna Lannister will resist against the Red Kraken's reaving from the latter half of the dance and throughout Aegon the Younger's regency, but did the Lannisters have a noteworthy navy at onset of the Dance as mentioned in Ep 9/10?

No.

Hence why they were easy targets.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Khloey said:

Re : Blood & Cheese

Doesn't Blood tries to go back with Jaehearys's head to get Daemon's reward ?

Yes, but all that kind of confirms is that Daemon was the one who arranged the entire thing. It doesn't confirm that Daemon specifically told Mysaria to murder one of Aegon's sons. After all, the entire Blood and Cheese narrative in FaB makes it clear that it is, in fact, not clear who the original target(s) of Blood and Cheese were. It does imply, though, that they settled on Helaena and her children because they could get to her while she was visiting Alicent in the Tower of the Hand.

2 hours ago, Khloey said:

I think you  @Lord Varys make very good points, but in the end, I really think Daemon will contact Mysaria and ask her to do his dirty deed. I like your argument about Mysaria wanting to show that even her can get to royal children as a revenge for what Larys did.

Without the Mysaria subplot the show gave us in episode 9, only with FaB in mind, the final decision who to kill could have been Blood and Cheese's as per the book. They were sent into the castle by Mysaria, presumably with considerable pressure to deliver results. Once they realized they could not kill (or dared not to attack) Aegon II (or Aemond) they could very well have decided to target the children all by themselves.

I mean, those goons weren't the sharpest knives in the box nor particularly loyal to the Black cause ... or else they would have realized that they were in a unique position to kill or capture crucial members of the Green leadership - Alicent and Otto.

2 hours ago, Khloey said:

Daemon and Mysaria might have a scene together in season 2 and plot it together. I don't know, but if they make Blood & Cheese as another misunderstanding/accident (after Alicent/Viserys, Aemond/Lucerys), it would be too much.

Oh, it would figure exactly the pattern if forces out of Rhaenyra/Daemon's control make the things worse than it was intended to be originally. They don't do things themselves, and that they want to portray things this way rather than the intentional actions of cackling, clichéd villains is clear already - we see how Alicent struggles with the fact that the coup/usurpation has been plotted without her, that she couldn't stop it even if she wanted to, that she is barely able to stop her father from trying to assassinate Rhaenyra and her family.

Then we have Aemond not really wanting to kill Luke, giving more agency to the dragons who are neither horses nor just mindless instruments.

For Blood and Cheese we clearly have the show giving Mysaria her own agenda and motivation, meaning she will see this through, not Daemon.

The show already did away with Mysaria being Daemon's best buddy, the one 'he trusted utterly', so if the guy reaches out to her Mysaria is not going to act because Daemon tells her or pays her. She will because she herself is going to want revenge on Alicent Hightower.

I assume we'll learn that Mysaria learns that Alicent was the one who authorized the burning of her manse.

16 hours ago, DMC said:

Not the target.  You're basically saying Daemon would have commissioned Mysaria to assassinate Aegon and/or Aemond, and instead she had Jaehaerys killed.  That's an obscene "miscommunication and mistake."

Not really. For one, Mysaria could, in the show, make it clear from the start that because of her own issue with Alicent she is not going to target an adult prince. Daemon can do nothing to stop Mysaria, after all.

Also, it could be an independent decision of Mysaria and/or Blood and Cheese inside the castle - they could know they have to kill somebody, so if they can't get to the Aegon or Aemond they could independently decide to settle on the children. That is what the book actually implies.

16 hours ago, DMC said:

Like I said, while the "son for a son" thing is certainly a warped sense of justice and barbarous vengeance, I definitely don't see it as indicative of being a "loose cannon" at all in terms of war strategy.  Indeed, from a strategic perspective it's a good way to inflame Aegon and/or Aemond into making a mistake.

If Daemon was fine with that kind of vengeance then technically the debt for Luke would have been paid for with Jaehaerys' life, so his later interest in hunting down/throwing away his own life to kill Aemond doesn't work all that well.

I'd go with Daemon wanting to kill Aemond via Mysaria for Luke ... just as I'd like to Daemon to actually plan to lure Aemond to Harrenhal to kill him there. For the show, it could make more sense to have Rhaenyra and/or Jace demand that Daemon join them for their attack on KL rather than planning to crush Aemond's army in the Riverlands.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Not really. For one, Mysaria could, in the show, make it clear from the start that because of her own issue with Alicent she is not going to target an adult prince. Daemon can do nothing to stop Mysaria, after all.

This seems to be getting really convoluted and I'm not even sure what you're arguing at this point.  So Mysaria would insist on killing Jaehaerys even though Daemon only wants either Aemond or Aegon to be killed but then Daemon is just like "yeah ok."  That doesn't sound like any miscommunication at all.

Anyway, I agree with your second graph, that makes more sense.  As in, Daemon says take out one of all three - Aemond, Aegon, OR Jaehaerys - and Mysaria and/or Blood and Cheese go with Jaehaerys either for revenge (Mysaria) or he's the easiest target (Blood and Cheese).

7 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

If Daemon was fine with that kind of vengeance then technically the debt for Luke would have been paid for with Jaehaerys' life, so his later interest in hunting down/throwing away his own life to kill Aemond doesn't work all that well.

I really don't see it that way.  First, why would Daemon ever be "satisfied" with vengeance?  That's not his character.  Second, by the time of the God's Eye, there's a whole shitton more to avenge anyway.