[Book Spoilers] Will Robb name the Heir to Winterfell?

[GoldenFleece]

I think it has more to do with D&D doesn't want to reveal anything about Jon's past or future. They have barely mentioned R+J and ToJ in the show. Having a Will making Jon heir to the Winterfell makes it too obvious what will happen in the future. They want the viewers to remain in the dark and more importantly, want the viewers to think Jon is just another character in the show.

If there is not a will, then Jon is an ursurper as long as the Stark children are all alive though. Let's just say that Jon is Lyanna's son - this still puts him behind Arya in the succession.

I don't think Jon is destined to be Lord of Winterfell, would be totally against his character to do so as long as the Stark children are alive - and I don't think they will all die.

[Greiffenstein]

Imo that scene in the books was not about Jon Snow ever becoming King in the North or Lord of Winterfell.

1) On Robb's part it was a political scheme. Since the war wasn't going very well for the Starks and his sister was married to Tyrion, Robb couldn't ignore the possibility of some of his (less loyal) bannermen trying to kill him in order to have a peace with the Lannisters who would inherit the North through Sansa. By naming Jon his heir, Robb simply tried to spoil any such plans by adding an element of uncertainty. Any possible traitor had to consider that Jon Snow might actually desert the Night's Watch, rally the remaining loyal Stark bannermen and hunt down the murderers of his brother. But since that didn't work out for Robb anyway, there was no need to have it in the show.

2) On Catelyn's part it was about reminding the readers how much she despised Jon, something that hadn't been shown for awhile and might be very important later on. Imo Lady Stoneheart will have to sacrifice her own life in order to revive the one person she hated for his entire life: Jon Snow. That's the reason why Thoros of Myr was able to bring back Beric Dondarrion several times until he revived LS. But Catelyn's hatred was displayed earlier that season when she told Talisa about the time when she prayed for Jon's death. So there was no reason to show it again.

3) Why would GRRM give us clues about Jon being the rightful King of Westeros and have him end up as Lord of Winterfell? Isn't that pretty much the only reason for Rickon being in the books and the show?

[Daena the Defiant]

Like I said, you can't go wrong betting on ShowRobb being BizzaroRobb. He does everything opposite of what BookRobb does. Robb goes back to retake Winterfell? BizzaroRobb will go for Casterly Rock. Robb wife is not pregnant but lives? BizzaroRobb's wife is pregnant but dead. Robb names Jon his heir? BizzaroRobb of course doesn't.

Ahem.

I believe you mean Bizzarobb.

[Daena the Defiant]

Imo that scene in the books was not about Jon Snow ever becoming King in the North or Lord of Winterfell.

1) On Robb's part it was a political scheme. Since the war wasn't going very well for the Starks and his sister was married to Tyrion, Robb couldn't ignore the possibility of some of his (less loyal) bannermen trying to kill him in order to have a peace with the Lannisters who would inherit the North through Sansa. By naming Jon his heir, Robb simply tried to spoil any such plans by adding an element of uncertainty. Any possible traitor had to consider that Jon Snow might actually desert the Night's Watch, rally the remaining loyal Stark bannermen and hunt down the murderers of his brother. But since that didn't work out for Robb anyway, there was no need to have it in the show.

2) On Catelyn's part it was about reminding the readers how much she despised Jon, something that hadn't been shown for awhile and might be very important later on. Imo Lady Stoneheart will have to sacrifice her own life in order to revive the one person she hated for his entire life: Jon Snow. That's the reason why Thoros of Myr was able to bring back Beric Dondarrion several times until he revived LS. But Catelyn's hatred was displayed earlier that season when she told Talisa about the time when she prayed for Jon's death. So there was no reason to show it again.

Ugh - she doesn't despise Jon, she just doesn't want some other woman's offspring usurping the rights of her own. And he hatred that animates Lady Stoneheart is not for Jon Snow, it's for Walder Frey, as evinced by her masterminding the systematic slaughtering of any Frey she comes across.

Way to miss the point of the character.

[juanml82]

So Talisa thinks of another man right after she just had sex with her own husband?

People really hate her, huh?

Oh no. She is thinking about her husband and how he off screen spoke to her about his half brother, and decided to secretly legitimize Jon as a gift for her husband and mother in law.

Which may not be seen that way by Robb or Cat if they ever found out, but this is Westeros. People don't usually think things through.

I think the lack of a will is a red herring. Jon is still Ned last supposedly living son. Stark loyalists and Bolton haters in the North can rally to him no matter his bastardy. The only stick in the wheel is Rickon, who's not only lampshaded as the heir to the North but also reportedly going to the Last Hearth, not Skagos. So Show!GNC, if any, would rally to Rickon instead of Jon. Or might decide to rally to both, as Jon can lead troops in battle.

[Mikeygigs]

So Talisa thinks of another man right after she just had sex with her own husband?

People really hate her, huh?

I don't hate her, but yeah, I knew I was grasping at straws.

I'm just trying to find a meaning for Catelyn's story about Jon Snow. There is no point to it, and it doesn't even set up any characterization since we knew she hated him in Season 1, and they're not ever going to meet again. So, why now, in season 3, does she tell this story to the audience? They haven't seen eachother in (RL time) 2 years, and it was very specific in what Catelyn wanted to do: e.g.- make Jon a Stark, which coincides with the whole Will thingy.

Why did the audience need to be reminded of their relationship when it would never be brought up again?

It was such a huge let down for that scene not to have any significance, ya know?

[Ghost's Shadow]

They might rewind a bit in next episode and there will be a scene?

If the GNC is true, it would be odd to just have the North go to Jon to say he's next in line without showing it. If you show it, people could look for clues over the next seasons to see if something happens, but if nothing is shown, you might not even remember who Robb was in 3 or 4 seasons' time.

And as was said: what's the point in a scene between Cat and Talisa about Jon if there's no consequences? Talisa had nothing to do with Jon. Heck, Jon might not even have known his brother married, book or show?

[David Selig]

Talisa can't legitimise anyone. She is a queen consort, not queen regnant, she doesn't have this kind of power.

[Gannicus]

This was a revealing episode.

I'm ready to put the Jeyne Westerling pregnancy theory and the northern conspiracy theory to rest.

It's possible the Blackfish could have escaped with the will, but it's odd they wouldn't have talked about it.

[Darryk]

So they left it out.

Question is whether they did so cause they felt it was too much of a giveaway that Robb would die, or because the will isn't as important as we thought.

Could be the former, as even though the RW still shocks in the books despite Robb's will, maybe certain things can be pulled off on the page that can't onscreen.

Really hope it's not cause Robb's will was just some red herring in the books.

[nirolo]

I don't hate her, but yeah, I knew I was grasping at straws.

I'm just trying to find a meaning for Catelyn's story about Jon Snow. There is no point to it, and it doesn't even set up any characterization since we knew she hated him in Season 1, and they're not ever going to meet again. So, why now, in season 3, does she tell this story to the audience? They haven't seen eachother in (RL time) 2 years, and it was very specific in what Catelyn wanted to do: e.g.- make Jon a Stark, which coincides with the whole Will thingy.

Why did the audience need to be reminded of their relationship when it would never be brought up again?

It was such a huge let down for that scene not to have any significance, ya know?

This is true, and I am actually wondering the same thing as well, since it was such a huge deviation from the books.

I actually thought I was one way to make Cat seem more sympathetic in that particular scene.

Yes, I am naive.

[Stark King in the North]

Its possible the blackfish has a copy of the will which will be revealed in the next episode, something like hes going over it in his mind an shows them talking as a memory or he makes his way back to riverrun and its sitting on the table beside the map and in a later season when under siege he escapes with it, i just find it something really important to miss out on , I was looking forward to seeing cold hands

[King Zee]

I have a query. to my knowledge the will gets mentioned once in ASOS. is it ever mentioned again ?

[nothatso]

Really hope it's not cause Robb's will was just some red herring in the books.

Not sure how you can make that statement with any certainty given that, with two books left, we don't yet know what happened to the people carrying it.

[Jambottle Jeebus]

I'm sure that next episode, the remaining Stark supporters will be all like " who do we route for now??" Then queue the Last will and testament of King Robb , and they'll be all like "Hey lookie here, Robb named his Bastard Bro Jon Snow Heir to Winterfell ! How bout that?!" This way D&D give all the non-readers a lil pick-up at the end of the season ;)

[Tyrion_is_Omar]

My denial Crackpot theory is that, instead of Lady Stoneheart or Purple Weeding, the final scene of the season will be:

We see that the blackfish escaped from The Twins with other person. This person ask him: where do we go now?

and he answers. To the North, to fulfill the King Robb's will and find his heir, the new king in the north.

That would give to the viewrs some hope, but also would let them wonder. who is Robb's heir.

And we wont see the Blackfish on the next seasons, like Barristan.

And would be similar to the Blackfish escaping from the lannister to an uncertain destination.

It has to be a reason why he went to the red weeding and survived instead of staying in Riverun. Because, he didn't do it anything important in the road.

[DemonKing]

Presumably in the show Robb doesn't feel the need to name an heir as his wife is pregnant so the succession should be obvious.

Not the same case as in the books at all.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Oddly, it's like showrunners are putting aside anything related Jon being someone else besides Ned's son. My unsullied have no idea about R+J or that Jon has a chance to be Robb's heir (because of the other kids being alive), so, either it will turn out to be non important (I doubt) or everything will be revealed as a big shock with no chance for people to speculate about.

[victim]

Oddly, it's like showrunners are putting aside anything related Jon being someone else besides Ned's son. My unsullied have no idea about R+J or that Jon has a chance to be Robb's heir (because of the other kids being alive), so, either it will turn out to be non important (I doubt) or everything will be revealed as a big shock with no chance for people to speculate about.

To be fair, most of my Sullied friends don't know about or believe R+L=J either, and when I attempt to explain it, they just brush it off as one of my crazy theories (even though it is no way my theory). I remember reading an interview where D&D, although come to think of it it may have been Brian Cogman, said they needed to be lenient with how they talk about past events. I think they'd rather sprinkle it over the years rather than bang it all out really quickly, which is why we've only ever had passing mentions of Rhaegar and Lyanna.

[bent branch]

I have a query. to my knowledge the will gets mentioned once in ASOS. is it ever mentioned again ?

No.