Alexia Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 1) Jon Arryn was poisoned by Lysa because he was going to take Robert away from her. Littlefinger, of course, provided the means to do it. It's quite unclear whether Ser Hugh of the Vale had any personal hand in carrying out the poisoning, but if he did, it was at Lysa's command.We were just chatting in another thread about the possibility that...That Varys's help is for Varys's own sake, I think, is a safe assumption, but I don't see any reason that Varys has to be wrong about the squire poisoning Lord Arryn. Yes, there's Lysa's later confession, but if Jon Arryn brings news of the Lannister treason to Robert Baratheon, that's just as disadvantageous to Varys as it is to Petyr Baelish. So, Petyr tries to get Lysa to poison Jon. Varys tries to get Hugh to poison Jon. And Pycelle ambles in after all of this is done, with no idea about it, and makes sure that the poison works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Друг- Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 Eh...it seems more likely that Varys just siezed on the coincidence that Gregor happened to kill Ser Hugh, and spun a conspiracy theory out of it. The part about Gregor being used by the Lannisters to tie up a loose end is clearly false (even under this theory, since Varys is the one supposedly behind it, not the Lannisters). Moreover, the little we know about Ser Hugh's personality doesn't seem to fit with him being a paid agent of the spider. He's an aspiring Knight of the Vale (whose pridefulness as a class is commented on more than once) and he personally displays hauteur by refusing to even speak to the man Ned sent to question him. Now it could be that the poor but ambitious squire is willing to sink to seedy depths of betrayal to advance his station, but what would he really have gained from any of it? He hadn't even been able to pay for his armour, iirc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexia Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 Eh...it seems more likely that Varys just siezed on the coincidence that Gregor happened to kill Ser Hugh, and spun a conspiracy theory out of it. The part about Gregor being used by the Lannisters to tie up a loose end is clearly false (even under this theory, since Varys is the one supposedly behind it, not the Lannisters). I don't disagree - it was in response to my post that basically said Varys played Ned like a set of pipes and cited the Ser Hugh incident as evidence. I still thought it was a pretty interesting theory though. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFDanny Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 2) That's about it. They're terrorizing the riverlands. They're mentioned again in AFfC. There's no real sub-plot to it, though, it's just a background detail right now.There is the rather large detail that it is Nymeria and her pack that discovers and drags Catelyn's body from the Trident. I'm also betting they play a role later on in the story, but as spoilers go, they are involved in the whole setup for Lady Stoneheart's debut in the epilogue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Molehill that Rides! Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 Yeah i remember that now. Thanks! Doesn't Arya warg into Nymeria to drag Catelyn's body out of the river, but she thinks it's just a dream right?Also there's got to be something to all those wolves if he keeps mentioning it, maybe setting up a pack large enough to take down a Dragon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schpat Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 Also there's got to be something to all those wolves if he keeps mentioning it, maybe setting up a pack large enough to take down a Dragon?I seriuosly doubt that is possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lossimur Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 I haven't seen the following point mentioned in the forums but it caught my attention when I first read it.At the end of AFfC when Jaime meets the Westerlings there is this about Robb's widow:"Jeyne was a willowy girl, no more than fifteen or sixteen, more awkward than graceful. She had narrow hips, breasts the size of apples, a mop of chestnut curls, and the soft brown eyes of a doe. Pretty enough for a child, Jaime decided, but not a girl to lose a kingdom for."This conflicts with Catelyn's observation when meeting Jeyne in ASoS:"She was pretty, undeniably, with her chestnut curls and heart-shaped face, and that shy smile. Slender, but with good hips, Catelyn noted. She should have no trouble bearing children, at least." and again..."The girl did seem to have a good heart, just as Robb had said. And good hips, which might be more important."The key point is the girls hips, noticed as narrow by Jaime but as good for bearing children (meaning wide) by Catelyn.So, is this a case of point of view, an inadvertent difference written by GRRM, or is this a subtle clue that the girl Jaime meets is a substitute? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 I put it down to a slip by GRRM, which we can sort of hand-wave by Jaime thinking her hips aren't to snuff, in contrast to Catelyn. Presumably, Cersei's then rather a lot curvier than most would credit her as being, which sort of puts me in an awkward position, not much caring for blondes but liking curvaceous hi....Sorry, got off on a tangent there. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schpat Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 I put it down to a slip by GRRM, which we can sort of hand-wave by Jaime thinking her hips aren't to snuff, in contrast to Catelyn. Presumably, Cersei's then rather a lot curvier than most would credit her as being, which sort of puts me in an awkward position, not much caring for blondes but liking curvaceous hi....Sorry, got off on a tangent there. ;)Yeah totally, the two descriptions are from two independant sources and each reflect the values of the observer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexia Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Presumably, Cersei's then rather a lot curvier than most would credit her as being, which sort of puts me in an awkward position, not much caring for blondes but liking curvaceous hi.... :lol: In your shoes, I would worry rather less about the blonde hair and rather more about the fates of Robert, Jaime, Lancel, and Kettleblack. :lol: :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Друг- Posted February 4, 2010 Share Posted February 4, 2010 So what's the background of Ser Theodan Wells, now calling himself Ser Theodan the True? There are houses named Wells in both Dorne and the North. Is he a deserter or broken man from Robb's army who hooked up with the sparrow movement before joining the new Faith Militant? Or a northman who was living in the South all along for some reason; as a knight in some southron lord's service or somesuch?On a similar note of someone seemingly far from home there was a Dornishman named Mallor in Tywin's service, of all the people in the world somehow, who was captured at the whispering Wood. How did that happen? A disaffected adventurer? Or a spy in Doran's service, sent to find any weaknesses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datepalm Posted February 4, 2010 Share Posted February 4, 2010 Hedge Knights, I'd assume - Like Arlan of Pennytree, they'd take service pretty much where ever they could find it, though I suppose there might be qualms of conscience joining someone who was off to fight the area where they had grown up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted February 4, 2010 Share Posted February 4, 2010 The name Theodan has always struck me as northernish, myself, but he could be Dornish, yeah. As to Mallor, some Dornish adventurer or sellsword knight, I'd guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexia Posted February 6, 2010 Share Posted February 6, 2010 This is a really silly question but I was looking at the minatures and chewing on the idea of buying a couple (Arya, Sansa, Robb) but got cold feet when I was looking at GRRM's blog and saw a comment about the minatures coming unpainted. Is that the case for all of them? You have to paint them yourself?I guess it makes sense since they aren't very expensive but I'm still a little disappointed. Thanks for letting me know either way. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackals Justice Posted February 6, 2010 Share Posted February 6, 2010 This is a really silly question but I was looking at the minatures and chewing on the idea of buying a couple (Arya, Sansa, Robb) but got cold feet when I was looking at GRRM's blog and saw a comment about the minatures coming unpainted. Is that the case for all of them? You have to paint them yourself?I guess it makes sense since they aren't very expensive but I'm still a little disappointed. Thanks for letting me know either way. :)http://www.reapermini.com/TheCraft/32 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted February 6, 2010 Share Posted February 6, 2010 You have to paint and assemble them yourself, I'm afraid. I have a bunch of these, still in the blister packs, because I know nothing of miniatures. GRRM notes you can hire people to handle the painting and so on, but it can cost more. A lot more, if you go for a high-end artist and a high-end paint job. See here for some pricing examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datepalm Posted February 6, 2010 Share Posted February 6, 2010 You have to paint and assemble them yourself, I'm afraid. I have a bunch of these, still in the blister packs, because I know nothing of miniatures. GRRM notes you can hire people to handle the painting and so on, but it can cost more. A lot more, if you go for a high-end artist and a high-end paint job. See here for some pricing examples.I always thought the whole fun of them was painting them yourself, though I guess theres something in just having them as display objects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted February 6, 2010 Share Posted February 6, 2010 True. It's a fine hobby that way. But there's definitely people who want them as display objects, seeing how beautiful they look after top-flight painter with years of experience under his or her belt gets their hands on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexia Posted February 6, 2010 Share Posted February 6, 2010 Thanks for the info everyone. I might try it out and see how bad a job I do. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datepalm Posted February 6, 2010 Share Posted February 6, 2010 Thanks for the info everyone. I might try it out and see how bad a job I do. :lol:Good luck and have fun! I did consider taking it up briefly, but I kept being surprised at just how tiny they are - I generally enjoy painting the occasionaly plaster figure, but those are larger - miniatures just strike me as too delicate and finicky to be that much fun, though I suppose they wouldn't be as chalenging if they were larger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.