Am I the only one that doesn't see Jon trying to take the throne?

[Rhaegar's Love]

Just to add on to the "why would Dany believe Jon".

As DenysJelmazmo pointed out, Dany is well aware of Rhaegar and Lyanna's relationship. She also had the vision in the HotU about the blue flower growing from a chink in the ice and the air smelling of sweetness. If she doesn't already know that Rhaegar crowned Lyanna QoLaB with blue roses, she could easily find this out via Selmy. So, she hears there's a guy at the Wall claiming to be the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna, remembers her blue flower vision and knowing about Rhaegar and Lyanna's relationship, surmises he's the real deal (though maybe not certain until after a dragon riding test). While yes, sigils are just representative, we constantly hear Dany talking about being the blood of the Dragon, so of course having a bond with a dragon would be a big deal for her.

I don't think it'll be easy for her to name Aegon a fake but she will do it in the end.

Ultimately though, I don't see Jon sitting the IT. At most he'll be King in the North after he saves everyone's asses from the Others and they decide that act is worthy of crowning him, wills and lines of succession be damned.

[Pikachu101]

There's no mummer backing him. My speculation was that Dany would find out, and go to Jon. As it stands, she's going to hear about Aegon from far away and have doubts about that. And there's an actual mummer backing him.

Say what? :shocked:

My whole argument was that why would Dany believe Aegon's the fake and not Jon?

Varys planned for her to die in the Dothraki sea. Any other Khal wouldn't have allowed her to do the things she did.

And now she's alive and he's adapted and changed his original plan; Varys is good at that. Like I said if he wants her to believe Aegon's the real deal then she'll believe Aegon's the real deal.

This shows that Daenerys obviously knows about what happened with Lyanna. The phrase "happy in his wife" and the direct association with Lyanna afterward shows that Dany associates her with a relationship with Rhaegar.

How does that prove a random bastard from the NWs is their son?

Does he have any Targ features?

Does he have any connections?

Does he have any solid evidence?

Is he linked to Targ allies, not the Usurper's dog?

Jon basically has nothing to vouch for himself, how dumb do you want Dany to be to get her to believe this? And even if she's stupid, I highly doubt her advisors would agree.

I never said that, you did. George is not completely free of cliches no matter how much we praise him. Brienne and King Robert come to mind in that aspect.

Brienne? If Brienne was a warrior woman cliche she'd be either sexy and feisty or have a makeover and suddenly become better looking than Cersei. Never in my life have I read a book about a brutish, ugly, taunted, warrior woman who is as naive as Sansa Stark.

I fail to see how Robert passes as a cliche either.

But just because you think it would be cliche and bad writing doesn't make it true. I happen to think if anyone could write what everyone is calling a "cliche" and write it well, its him.

Dude you think Dany will have a "vision" and decide Jon's her long lost Targaryen nephew. That story is so overused and so utterly predictable it's actually painful fans are speculating it to be true.

I'm a Stannis fangirl but I would honestly hate it if he was AA or PTWP, because its boring.

Silver hair and purple eyes are quite common in Essos. That proves nothing, other than Darkstar and Ashara being Targs and I know how much this forum hates the secret Targ concept, so that's hardly evidence.

Targ features > Stark features

And I'm sure dark hair and grey eyes are a helluva lot more common. So I go back to my original point; why would Dany think Aegon's a fake but Jon isn't?

The army Young Griff has is the Golden Company, founded by the Blackfyres... Dany knows about the Blackfyre Pretenders, keyword pretenders.

He also has Jon Connington and Dorne, would a pretender have these strong connections?

Also by winning Stormsend he's already proven himself. According to medieval superstition winning battles means your claim is true

She would doubt him there. And if she finds out about Varys backing him/setting it all up it'll be more evidence that he's the mummer's dragon.

Yes because Vary = mummer's dragon :rolleyes:

She doesn't even know who Varys is and considering he's the one who sent him to her, I'm pretty sure Tyrion would back him as a Targ supporter. Especially after he killed Kevan just so the Targ accession would be easier.

Still haven't explained how Jon is more believable. Aegon has connections, Jon can't even vouch on the support of one region.

As above, I've shown that Lyanna has a connection with Rhaegar that Dany knows about. that's his connection.

You don't know what a connection is do you?

Let me explain; a connection is someone who can back you, someone who can step up and vouch for your claim.

Aegon has this, Jon doesn't. So I repeat in what logical manner is Jon more believable than Aegon?

Yes, that was my exact point and its one I don't think unrealistic, cliche, or bad writing. My suggestion was that some sort of prophetic/mystical phenomenon will tell Dany about Jon. And why not? HotU showed her past, present, and future things, some she doesn't even know about yet like the Red Wedding. Why is not feasible that Dany, who has Quaithe, could find out about Rhaegar/Lyanna in a magic way, just as Bran would?

See this is why I can't stand King Jon theories, they just want everything to be a walk in the park where Jon would have an undisputed claim and face no challenges :stillsick:

This is almost as bad as people believing a scrap of paper or the Daynes and Martells always knowing.

There's no logic, no evidence and certainly not ASOIAF's writing style. But fans still insist on Jon having the most utterly predictable, cliche ending to a series that is anything but that.

Your whole argument is full of loop holes and a stretch to the actual plot, you're ignoring the importance of the GoT in determining who sits on the IT and you have still yet to give me a logical reason as to why Dany would think Aegon's a fake but not Jon.

[Toshio.Keepiru]

I actually don't want Jon to take the throne (or attempt to). I think it would make for bad writing. I see him leading an army against the others. I would even be ok if he rode one of the dragons (though I might roll my eyes a little). But Iron Throne? Hell no!

I think that the fight against the others leads to his death (albeit a heroic one that somehow brings about the end of the threat of the Others or in some other way resolves that conflict for several hundred years).

If he somehow survives til the end (unlikely imo) he is disgusted by the political maneuverings about the IT (if it still exists) and slips away to become a no name soldier of fortune, who has been changed by exposure to the magic of the others and when enraged his eyes turn blue while his muscles bulge and rip his shirt. While he swings Longclaw with enough force to cleave trees in two. Also while enraged he is nigh invulnerable and tends to scream "Hedge" or "Spoon", maybe "Fork".

[LordStoneheart]

Brienne? If Brienne was a warrior woman cliche she'd be either sexy and feisty or have a makeover and suddenly become better looking than Cersei. Never in my life have I read a book about a brutish, ugly, taunted, warrior woman who is as naive as Sansa Stark.

I fail to see how Robert passes as a cliche either.

You have a serious problem with the word cliche if you think all women warriors ever have been beautiful. And fat, drunken, whore king is much more common than this supposed King Jon cliche. Sure, Robert has more to him than just that, but cliches are broadly defined.

Dude you think Dany will have a "vision" and decide Jon's her long lost Targaryen nephew. That story is so overused and so utterly predictable it's actually painful fans are speculating it to be true.

I'm a Stannis fangirl but I would honestly hate it if he was AA or PTWP, because its boring.

I like how whenever you bring up cliches/trope you're never specific. Just because you say it is doesn't make it that. And you've seriously misinterpreted the text if you think Stannis at all is in the running for AA/PTWP if that concept does come to pass.

Targ features > Stark features

We've no evidence of that. We have evidence to the contrary in Aegor Rivers. Targ traits generally are not dominant traits, which is why there was a lot of inbreeding. Elia's kids looked like her.

I didn't say that Dany knowing about Rhaegar passing ove Elia for Lyanna proves it, I said its a connection on how to figure it out. Its a much less flimsy story than baby-switcheroo and hidden from his family for 15 years

You don't know what a connection is do you?

Yes, and I gave plenty. You just ignored them or wrote them off.

I don't see whats so unbelievable (or cliche for that matter) about Dany figuring out she has a nephew based on visions she's had or will receive, and seeking him out to rule and is shunned. What is unbelievable is everything about Aegon's story. Also, people think JonCon died. He could just as easy be a pretender, especially since Dany has no idea who he is. On the surface Aegon looks like a Blackfyre pretender, and since Dany has shown that she listens to these prophecies quite a lot, I find it logically unlikely that she'll believe Aegon's legit. And yes, she has followed the visions a lot. "Mother," "Treasons," "Mounts."

But I suppose I'm clocking out of this discussion since we seem to have a rift in what we consider cliches.

[King Zee]

Of course, some sort of irrefutable proof might exist, somewhere,much like Robb's document / will..

much like how King Robert's will naming Ned as Lord Protector was irrefutable,

[Jorelle Mormont]

@DenysJelmazmo -- Pikachu101 was speaking of political connections, not the more broad idea of which you speak.

[Pikachu101]

much like how King Robert's will naming Ned as Lord Protector was irrefutable,

Which is why I have a problem with the idea that people would comply to some 15 year old document when Aegon and Dany are in the scene.

I've honestly believe that Aegon would rebuke anything that proves Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, thus making Jon a bastard with no claim whatsoever. Richard III was able to do this to Edward IV's children and that should have been a lot harder considering the fact that they've spent more than a decade as the recognised royal heirs.

When it comes down to who takes the IT, it will come down to one simple question; who has the strongest backer? Legitimacy, blood, lineage, succession laws etc. doesn't decide who wins the throne, so Jon honestly has nothing to help him

[aceluby]

Which is why I have a problem with the idea that people would comply to some 15 year old document when Aegon and Dany are in the scene.

I've honestly believe that Aegon would rebuke anything that proves Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, thus making Jon a bastard with no claim whatsoever. Richard III was able to do this to Edward IV's children and that should have been a lot harder considering the fact that they've spent more than a decade as the recognised royal heirs.

When it comes down to who takes the IT, it will come down to one simple question; who has the strongest backer? Legitimacy, blood, lineage, succession laws etc. doesn't decide who wins the throne, so Jon honestly has nothing to help him

Totally disagree with that assessment simply because you have no idea what could possibly happen and write off possibilities simply because you don't like them. If Stannis dies (for whatever reason), Jon has the North, the Wildlings, and possibly Stannis' army/sellswords at his disposal. At that point he has a better chance than Stannis does now to claim the IT. If there is proof of R+J=L (not saying there is, but if something happens to happen in this regard) he has a chance to secure all of the Targ supporters in Westeros + Dany. If he's somehow able to procure a dragon his chances are even greater. To write him off because of some preconceived notions about books not yet written simply because you personally find them to be 'cliche' is not a solid argument. It could happen and there are many ways for it to happen in the 2-3k pages left. There is a chance that Jon can get the backing he needs and at this point has as good of a chance as anyone to do so.

[King Zee]

Totally disagree with that assessment simply because you have no idea what could possibly happen and write off possibilities simply because you don't like them. If Stannis dies (for whatever reason), Jon has the North, the Wildlings, and possibly Stannis' army/sellswords at his disposal.

incorrect.

If Stannis dies - Shireen has his army. if Shireen dies, expect the Queen's men to follow Melisandre and the Kings men to go rogue.

and if Rickon is around, the North will back HIM as KotN not go on some quest for the Iron Throne.

and the Wildings...well that's a fickle bunch, who will run if Jon becomes unJon.

[aceluby]

incorrect.

If Stannis dies - Shireen has his army. if Shireen dies, expect the Queen's men to follow Melisandre and the Kings men to go rogue.

and if Rickon is around, the North will back HIM as KotN not go on some quest for the Iron Throne.

and the Wildings...well that's a fickle bunch, who will run if Jon becomes unJon.

Not a single one of those things has been written, which is my whole point! You guys are writing off possibilities with fan fiction that you consider foregone conclusions. Why can't you just admit that given what has been written that there is at the very least a possibility that it could happen? Could Mel back Jon as AAR? Yep. Could Rickon back Jon? Yep. Could Jon save Mance and unite the wildlings w/ the others? Yep. Could Jon convince the IB that he's the true king and get the loan that Stannis got? Yep. Could it happen exactly as you or Pikachu says it will happen? Yep.

My point is that Jon's arc is interesting because almost every possibility is actually possible, could be written very well (as in not cliche), and is well within Jon's character as we know it so far. Could he sit the IT? Sure. Could he be crowned KITN? Given certain unknown circumstances, yes. Could he stay w/ the NW? Absolutely. Could he run away w/ Val and have beautiful Val babies and farm some land? Sure. To think you can guess exactly what's going to happen is pretty ridiculous regarding Jon. There are just too many possiblities.

[Pikachu101]

Totally disagree with that assessment simply because you have no idea what could possibly happen and write off possibilities simply because you don't like them.

I don't mind if Jon becomes king as long as there's a logical explanation, even if it's something like when Mel resurrects him he's darker and more sinister.

What I can't stand is fans giving weak theories as reasoning e.g. Dany had a vision, the Martells always knew, there's something in WF's crypts etc.

If Stannis dies (for whatever reason), Jon has the North, the Wildlings, and possibly Stannis' army/sellswords at his disposal.

First of all Stannis' men would flock to Shireen, not some bastard on the Wall who thinks he's Rhaegar Targaryen's son.

Secondly the Wildlings are unstable anarchists who don't recognise hierarchy, order, discipline, elitism etc. only an idiot would use them as an army.

Thirdly why would the North believe Jon's a Targaryen? Also if he meets Dany and claims to be her nephew with only the support of the region who fought against the Targs, he's basically committing suicide.

At that point he has a better chance than Stannis does now to claim the IT.

Not really, the Targs lost any claim they had the minute Robert sat on the throne. Dany and Aegon have to win it back through conquest and Stannis has to win it back through force and with the law on his side.

If there is proof of R+J=L (not saying there is, but if something happens to happen in this regard) he has a chance to secure all of the Targ supporters in Westeros + Dany.

Doubt it, the only thing Targ supporters would see is some Northern bastard who thinks he's Rhaegar's son. They'd be flocking to Aegon, not Jon.

If he's somehow able to procure a dragon his chances are even greater.

That's a terrible idea, almost as bad as Jon proving to have the blood of the dragon by riding one.

As far as I'm concerned, the only reason why he'd ever be able to ride a dragon is because he (just like the rest of the Stark kids) is a warg.

To write him off because of some preconceived notions about books not yet written simply because you personally find them to be 'cliche' is not a solid argument.

I find it "cliche" because every reason a fan has given me to why he should be king is so painfully simple. They think Jon should unquestioningly become king and everyone would flock to the Northern bastard with no connections, not the silver haired warrior who has JC and Dorne.

They give me such simple reasons where Jon's succession is a walk in the park. When has the GoT ever been a walk in the park? Especially when the contender is some bastard who has no men, no connections, no legal basis, no support and definitely no evidence to prove his heritage.

[Fire Eater]

Yes he does, and if it becomes an Aegon v. Jon scenario I think we all know who Dany would assume is the mummer's dragon.

What evidence? I don't see a birth certificate anywhere.

You know everyone keeps on saying this but I really don't see the logic behind Dany killing him.

1. She's barren, she needs him to continue the line

2. Aegon's goal was to marry her, not overthrow or kill her

3. She could marry him to either Sansa, Margaery or Arianne and this securing the Targ position

4. Judging by their positions at the end of ADWD I don't think Dany's coming to Westeros anytime soon. Meaning the DoD 2.0 could possibly be Aegon v. Jon

1. Dany isn't barren as she had a miscarriage in ADwD

2. If Dany just joined with Aegon when she lands, the entire series would be over in TWoW since their combined strength would be able to take KL and defeat Stannis. Aegon won't side with Dany if she states he is a false pretender, and denies his claim to the IT.

3. Aegon will marry Arianne, and he will have Dorne's backing.

4.Jon is at the Wall busy dealing with the Others.Why would he come south to press a claim without an army when there are more pressing concerns at the Wall? The Dance of Dragons was between a man and a woman so it won't be Jon v. Aegon. Dany will come to Westeros since she is the only one who can start a DoD 2.0, and if she stays in Essos, what is the point of her storyline if it doesn't contribute to anything in Westeros?

Doubt it

A) the South don't care about the Wall

B ) some bastard saying he's Rhaegar's son won't change their minds

C) Aegon is currently in a battle for his throne and Jon's going to be waiting a long time for Dany

D) politics decides who has a claim on the IT, not mythical creatures only the Wall has seen

Where did this come from? After ADWD she was no where near Mereen let alone Westeros.

Jon isn't the rightful heir to anything and I highly doubt Dany would follow orders from a Northern bastard on the Wall.

We've been through this before, I provided the scenario where Jon presses his claim and Dany comes to WF. Jon is the rightful Targaryen heir by Westerosi tradition and rules of primogeniture.

So you're one of those fans who accept that the only way Jon could ever logically become king is if George pulls off a cliche fantasy trope?

Really, King Arthur?

Calling something cliche is a poor argument especially in light of the evidence of Jon having Arthurian parallels.

Arthur

Arthur's father, Uther, was royalty whose sigil was a red dragon.

Uther married and impregnated, Igraine, his enemy's wife.

Arthur's mother died birthing him.

Arthur was raised ignorant of his royal heritage and parentage.

After Uther died, the realm was plunged into chaos and civil war until Arthur turned eighteen and pulled the sword from the stone.

Jon

Jon's father, Rhaegar, was royalty, and the Targ sigil is a red dragon

Rhaegar married and impregnated Lyanna, the betrothed of his enemy, Robert.

Jon's mother died birthing him.

Jon was raised ignorant of his royal heritage and parentage.

After Rhaegar died, the realm was plunged into war with the Greyjoy Rebellion and the Wo5K. In less than two years, Jon will turn eighteen.

A bit too convenient for my liking, I mean why in gods name would Dany ever recognise some Northern bastard as a Targaryen when there's Aegon?

Like I posted before, the problem Jon presents is a claim to the throne that is at odds with Dany's. Aegon will be dead by then.

There's no such thing as "blood of the dragon" honestly Illiroy was right, the Westerosi sew a beast onto a peace of cloth and then decide they are that beast.

Sansa, Arya, Bran or Rickon could ride a dragon because they're all wargs, and if Jon does ride one that would be the reason as well. Not some nonsense like "blood of the dragon"

Dany believes in the "blood of the dragon", and so does Tyrion according to his conversation with Brown Ben.

For the sake of a good plot and strong writing I hope George doesn't do any of that.

It can still be done with a good plot and strong writing.

Who said it has to make a contribution to the story? Maybe King Jon fans think it does, but I certainly don't. I'd honestly rather George reveals it only to give the IT to (f)Aegon; a helluva lot more interesting and ASOIAF like.

The rule of the Chekhov's gun says it must, and GRRM has been following that rule studiously. Having then IT go to fAegon would has just been introduced in ADwD out of nowhere would be quality of writing that is below GRRM's threshold.

It would be more interesting if Aegon is revealed as a fake, and there is a DoD 2.0 between him and Dany.

How dull and cliche would it be if George abandons the politics, the scheming, the GoT, the careful planning etc. just so he could use a cliche King Arthur fantasy trope?

Everything has been done before so everything is cliche in a way, otherwise it's just an argument that posters use when their quiver is empty. I explained it in a way that fits yet that hasn't satisfied you. The scene I describe wouldn't be an abandonment of politics, and GRRM shows with Doran's and Illyrio's plans that careful planning isn't foolproof.

[Barristan the G.O.A.T]

Jon will be King..........of the NORTH

[Ingelheim]

He won't take the throne. And he wouldn't want it.

[Promise Me]

I do believe that L+R= J, and like most of you, he does not need to sit on the Iron Throne! Although, he is illegitimate son of that union, he is still the son of a highborn lady, does that not entitle him to have the Stark’s last name? He is needed in North and the protection of the North, Winterfell and NW should be his priority!

I would also like to believe he would be one of the riders on the Dragons.

[aceluby]

snip

I'm not going to debate specifics with you because they are frankly ridiculous. What if Shireen dies? What if Mel flocks to Jon? What if Jon saves Mance? All of those happen and BOOM! your entire post on what you thought would happen is gone. Is it not possible that this can happen? Of course it can and you saying it can't because of x, y, or z is just as bad as any fandom from Jon. Saying Jon can or cannot take the throne due to events that have not happened yet is ignorant on both sides. You are not better than the Jon fans in this regard and I'd say you are a bit worse since most of the Jon fans at least leave open the possibility of unforeseen events that could change. You act like you already know what's going to happen and you just don't.

I've said it before, Jon is a wonderfully written character because his development and plot leave open a world of possibilities.

[Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™]

What evidence? I don't see a birth certificate anywhere.

1. Dany isn't barren as she had a miscarriage in ADwD

2. If Dany just joined with Aegon when she lands, the entire series would be over in TWoW since their combined strength would be able to take KL and defeat Stannis. Aegon won't side with Dany if she states he is a false pretender, and denies his claim to the IT.

3. Aegon will marry Arianne, and he will have Dorne's backing.

4.Jon is at the Wall busy dealing with the Others.Why would he come south to press a claim without an army when there are more pressing concerns at the Wall? The Dance of Dragons was between a man and a woman so it won't be Jon v. Aegon. Dany will come to Westeros since she is the only one who can start a DoD 2.0, and if she stays in Essos, what is the point of her storyline if it doesn't contribute to anything in Westeros?

We've been through this before, I provided the scenario where Jon presses his claim and Dany comes to WF. Jon is the rightful Targaryen heir by Westerosi tradition and rules of primogeniture.

Calling something cliche is a poor argument especially in light of the evidence of Jon having Arthurian parallels.

Arthur

Arthur's father, Uther, was royalty whose sigil was a red dragon.

Uther married and impregnated, Igraine, his enemy's wife.

Arthur's mother died birthing him.

Arthur was raised ignorant of his royal heritage and parentage.

After Uther died, the realm was plunged into chaos and civil war until Arthur turned eighteen and pulled the sword from the stone.

Jon

Jon's father, Rhaegar, was royalty, and the Targ sigil is a red dragon

Rhaegar married and impregnated Lyanna, the betrothed of his enemy, Robert.

Jon's mother died birthing him.

Jon was raised ignorant of his royal heritage and parentage.

After Rhaegar died, the realm was plunged into war with the Greyjoy Rebellion and the Wo5K. In less than two years, Jon will turn eighteen.

Like I posted before, the problem Jon presents is a claim to the throne that is at odds with Dany's. Aegon will be dead by then.

Dany believes in the "blood of the dragon", and so does Tyrion according to his conversation with Brown Ben.

It can still be done with a good plot and strong writing.

The rule of the Chekhov's gun says it must, and GRRM has been following that rule studiously. Having then IT go to fAegon would has just been introduced in ADwD out of nowhere would be quality of writing that is below GRRM's threshold.

It would be more interesting if Aegon is revealed as a fake, and there is a DoD 2.0 between him and Dany.

Everything has been done before so everything is cliche in a way, otherwise it's just an argument that posters use when their quiver is empty. I explained it in a way that fits yet that hasn't satisfied you. The scene I describe wouldn't be an abandonment of politics, and GRRM shows with Doran's and Illyrio's plans that careful planning isn't foolproof.

Actually Stannis is the rightful heir, Targaryens lost their claim after robert established Baratheons as the royal family.

[Pikachu101]

What evidence? I don't see a birth certificate anywhere.

He doesn't need a birth certificate; people know Elia and Rhaegar had a son called Aegon.

What Aegon has:

Targ features

Connections

An army

Stormsend

Varys

What Jon has:

Stark features

No connections

No army

No great conquest

No player behind him

2. If Dany just joined with Aegon when she lands, the entire series would be over in TWoW since their combined strength would be able to take KL and defeat Stannis.

Would it really?

A) Dany's in no position to come to Westeros

B ) the GoT is never straight forward, Varys could decide Dany's no longer needed

C) What's the difference between Dany supporting Jon then?

Aegon won't side with Dany if she states he is a false pretender, and denies his claim to the IT.

And why would she do that?

3. Aegon will marry Arianne, and he will have Dorne's backing.

Marrying Arianne is a waste, Dorne would already ally with him because he's Elia's son. Aegon's a good asset to have in order to win over regions; he could marry Sansa and get the North, Vale and Riverlands over or Margaery and win over the rich and powerful Reach.

4.Jon is at the Wall busy dealing with the Others.Why would he come south to press a claim without an army when there are more pressing concerns at the Wall?

That's what I want to know as well. Why would Jon even care about something as meaningless as the IT when there's the Others?

The Dance of Dragons was between a man and a woman so it won't be Jon v. Aegon.

What makes you so sure of that? Just because the first one was between a man and woman doesn't mean the second one has to be.

Dany will come to Westeros since she is the only one who can start a DoD 2.0, and if she stays in Essos, what is the point of her storyline if it doesn't contribute to anything in Westeros?

I'd like to see George rush her storyline, her ADWD chapters were so boring. But I doubt it, it's been five books I don't see why he'd be in a rush to send her to Westeros when she's not even in Mereen.

We've been through this before, I provided the scenario where Jon presses his claim and Dany comes to WF.

I don't see Jon pressing his claim, he's not stupid enough. Unless Mel's resurrection give his personality a 180 :dunno:

Where did you get this from? I know there's a lot of speculations but I would love to know why she'd be in WF when there's a dude down South whose claiming to be Rhaegar's son.

Jon is the rightful Targaryen heir by Westerosi tradition and rules of primogeniture.

Actually Aegon's the Targaryen rightful heir, and because Jon can't prove his legitimacy let alone his parentage he doesn't actually have a claim.

Also by Westerosi traditions and rules the throne is Stannis'. The Targs lost it by conquest which is why the only way Dany and Aegon can get it back is through conquest.

Calling something cliche is a poor argument especially in light of the evidence of Jon having Arthurian parallels.

You do know Jon having "Arthurian parallels" just screams cliche?

We're talking about a series where players, politics, plots and schemes determine who sits on the IT. Not a bastard who claims to be the son of the old crown prince. ASOIAF isn't the books from our childhood.

Now if you said a player manipulates his claim to try and get the throne; now that's plot worthy and ASOIAF like.

Like I posted before, the problem Jon presents is a claim to the throne that is at odds with Dany's. Aegon will be dead by then.

Too convenient for Aegon to be dead; am I the only one who thinks Jon's not dumb enough to stake a claim when there's a chick with dragons and a dude with an army?

Dany believes in the "blood of the dragon", and so does Tyrion according to his conversation with Brown Ben.

Just because you believe in it doesn't mean it's true. Jon won't ride a dragon because he's a Targ, he'd only be able to ride a dragon because he's a warg. But I'd rather Bran was the third head, his arc has to build up to something useful.

It would be more interesting if Aegon is revealed as a fake, and there is a DoD 2.0 between him and Dany.

Really? The true Targ heir defeating the fake is more interesting than the fake getting away with it?

I guess you're also going to tell me that Dany would instantly believe Jon's telling the truth?

[Fire Eater]

He doesn't need a birth certificate; people know Elia and Rhaegar had a son called Aegon.

What Aegon has:

Targ features

Connections

An army

Stormsend

Varys

None of which you provided is evidence. There is nothing to link Aegon to Rhaegar's son. Aegon does have Targ looks, but as Cersei said so do half the whores in Lys.

If the Dance of Dragons 2.0 follows the narrative of Oldtown and the Stormlands siding with Aegon and the Vale supporting Rhaenyra in the first Dance, then it will likely follow the pattern of male claimant vs. female claimant as well, otherwise GRRM just could have made the first Dance of Dragons a fight between two male heirs.

Everything you need to know about the subject based on evidence I found.

[Pikachu101]

None of which you provided is evidence. There is nothing to link Aegon to Rhaegar's son.

I think Jon Connington and Dorne would beg to differ. Also according to medieval superstition victories are shown as evidence that God is on your side, so the conquest of Stormsend (which is one of Westeros' strongest fortresses) can definitely be used as proof.

Aegon does have Targ looks, but as Cersei said so do half the whores in Lys.

The Targ look is part of the overwhelming evidence Aegon has to prove his claim. Any silver haired man can't say he's a Targ but Aegon can because he has connections.

Dance, then it will likely follow the pattern of male claimant vs. female claimant as well, otherwise GRRM just could have made the first Dance of Dragons a fight between two male heirs.

I don't understand why you think just because the first one was between a man and a woman, the second one should be. Also I don't see why Dany and Aegon won't team up against Jon, especially if she's convinced that Jon's the mummer's dragon.

Honestly how dull would it be if the true Targ heirs joined forces and destroyed the fake? I'd rather have a plot which has readers screaming at the pages telling Dany she's making a mistake