Game of Thrones: TV Series - Season 8 (Book spoilers in tags with warning)

**Captain Jin** · July 01, 2016, 07:01 PM

Originally Posted by saxdude

I like Robert about as much as I like Rhaeghar (I could share a beer with either of them), but my main support of him over Rhaegar is simply that Robert Baratheon was a dudebro that fell, by no fault of his own, into the morally correct side of the war. Sure he didn't really love Lyanna,

Actually he did really love her, but Lyanna knew from his nature that he would never be satisfied with just one woman, despite the fact that he did indeed love her.

but then again she was the one to leave without so much as a warning into what looked like a kidnapping

No one know what it looked like. We know she left with him and that assumptions were made about the nature of that. Of course Proud Robert to whom she was promised, and probably also cared for, believed that the only possible situation was that she was kidnapped against her own will. And again, young people doing thing over love/hormones isn't such a crazy concept. Neither is not thinking through the potential consequences, and this is perhaps more true of people in influential positions or places of power.

caused the death of Roberts bestfriends brother and father, and plundged Westeros into civil war. Lyanna and Rhaeghar were horribly selfish, and together with Aerys justified every action Robert took after the fact until his marriage with Cersei.

Oh yes, because two lovers running off is bound to result in Brandon riding to the Red Keep and demanding Rhaegar show up to die, resulting in the Mad King doing his perverse thing that he did. Rhaegar and Lyanna might be indirectly responsible for that, but it was Aerys' actions that ultimately led to the war. Imprisoning Brandon and his mates, then demanding that their fathers show in court to answer for their actions, only to put almost all of them to death in one form or another and THEN also demanding that their heirs be executed (ie Ned) at which point Jon Aryn refused and basically the only option was to openly rebel. That's like ultimate worst case scenario and I'm sure that young people in love don't see or recognize the potential for such a thing happening.

**Roma_Victrix** · July 01, 2016, 09:45 PM

It just came to me: I might have to retract my statement about Tyrion and at a later date even apologize to Saxdude, who might be right about it:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

**Påsan** · July 02, 2016, 12:06 AM

My bet is Jaime does it. He's the kingslayer. He'll eventually realize Cersei is a new mad king and stab her.

**Condottiere 40K** · July 02, 2016, 01:22 AM

Viola would marry the Duke and continue screwing Sebastian.

**saxdude** · July 02, 2016, 09:12 AM

Actually he did really love her, but Lyanna knew from his nature that he would never be satisfied with just one woman, despite the fact that he did indeed love her.

Maybe, maybe not, love is a matter of perspective, but it doesn't matter what he felt for ger in the long term.

No one know what it looked like. We know she left with him and that assumptions were made about the nature of that. Of course Proud Robert to whom she was promised, and probably also cared for, believed that the only possible situation was that she was kidnapped against her own will. And again, young people doing thing over love/hormones isn't such a crazy concept. Neither is not thinking through the potential consequences, and this is perhaps more true of people in influential positions or places of power.

It is entirely true of young people and young people in power, and it's perfectly true to life. But then again I'm not saying it's not realistic, I'm saying it was dumb, foolish, irresponsible, arrogant, self centered, and ultimatly evil (however unintentional), and even as teens they are perfectly accountable for their actions. They screwed over so many peoples lives without even an ounce of remorse over their stupid ideas of romance and love (and profecy), that to expect people to forgive them, let alone admire them is nonsensical. Besides, Rhaegar was 22 or 23, whats his excuse?
And also Ellaria, Who thought about Ellaria?

Oh yes, because two lovers running off is bound to result in Brandon riding to the Red Keep and demanding Rhaegar show up to die, resulting in the Mad King doing his perverse thing that he did. Rhaegar and Lyanna might be indirectly responsible for that, but it was Aerys' actions that ultimately led to the war. Imprisoning Brandon and his mates, then demanding that their fathers show in court to answer for their actions, only to put almost all of them to death in one form or another and THEN also demanding that their heirs be executed (ie Ned) at which point Jon Aryn refused and basically the only option was to openly rebel. That's like ultimate worst case scenario and I'm sure that young people in love don't see or recognize the potential for such a thing happening.

Well sure they didn't see it all coming but what else would they assume? Lyanna had been betrothed to Robert, period, she isn't living in the CW, that

has consequences. And lets assume she didn't expect Brandon and Rickon to chase after her to demand a response from the Mad King (a totally valid response given that she just up and dissapeared) and end up with their deaths, why didn't she do anything about it? Where was she when Brandon was imprisoned? When they were killed? When the order was issued to end her family line and that of Robert? Did Rhaegar not tell her? Why did Rhaegar not tell her? Why did Rhaegar not do anything?
Well because they were too busy honeymooning it up to care. "I will just defeat Robert at the Trident, and be named king my love", was the extent of their care for the political situation they left in the Kingdom, and being teenage starcrossed lovers doesn't do it as a justification for me, not as a reader, not as a noble, and certainly not as a peasant.

**Kyriakos** · July 02, 2016, 10:02 PM

^It's not Ellaria. It is Elia.
Elia. Say her name!

**saxdude** · July 02, 2016, 10:45 PM

Really? Why am I saying Ellaria? hmmm

**Roma_Victrix** · July 04, 2016, 02:11 AM

Originally Posted by Captain Jin

Actually he did really love her, but Lyanna knew from his nature that he would never be satisfied with just one woman, despite the fact that he did indeed love her.

I guess you could say that, at the very least, Lyanna gave Rhaegar a serious, raging "Tower of Joy", if you catch my drift.

Eh? Eh? No one?

Gotta put that "tower" somewhere.

**Captain Jin** · July 04, 2016, 09:03 AM

Originally Posted by Roma_Victrix

I guess you could say that, at the very least, Lyanna gave Rhaegar a serious, raging "Tower of Joy", if you catch my drift.

Eh? Eh? No one?

Well we know Lyanna rode a dragon long before Dany ever did.

**Condottiere 40K** · July 04, 2016, 09:26 AM

Tower, dragons, stallions mounting worlds.

This brings to mind another equine.

**Gaidin** · July 04, 2016, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by RedGuard

Oh you sweet summer child. Do you really think that a war against the white walkers will be "run"? They are going to come and

everything up for everyone, and winterfell will be taken. Sansa and the survivors will probably end up heading south to either Riverun or the Eyrie, if they can get that far.

Oh you bitter, unschooled fanboy. Did you miss the importance of the events last two episodes? Did you miss the importance of the character history for those still alive?

The last two episodes were literally them cleaning the slate so the developed main characters would then have room on tv to move against each other. Not a bad idea for the books either if he only wants two books left in the series. But it remains to be seen if something similar does or doesn't happen.

Now, I'm going to leave the Night's Watch main characters to the side and discuss just the others that are playing, normal political characters as such.

The Geography

Why do we need to divide the world down to the major characters? Well, first, the world will fall down into the biggest war it's ever seen. The question we have to ask is what sides the countries are on. We have a preference given the list of countries. But not really given the culture of the different lands.

The Lannisters have functionally managed to take over the Riverlands. Do they have anything to fear from it regarding the idea of a domicile land? That is, possibly stretching idea. But they no longer have to deploy an a huge army to keep the main nobles and employments moving hugely against them.

Sure. There are always small people against them. But GRR is more interested the big people.

The Big People in Riverlands have Surrendered and the Riverlands are now the Lannister's. Well, surrendered may be a strong word given the popular word. But the region at large is the Lannisters given what happened in the recent battle. The point being, they can move their armies at large.

For the Crownlands? Well the only things they may be missing is the Dragonstone. Maybe. And well, I'm not sure they even care.

The Lannisters have always had a strategic control of the Westerlands. To the point the books haven't even gone into them to a functional degree for a high level war. The show certainly hasn't either.

No matter what Cersei does, no matter when and where Daenerys invades, these are lands that are questionable on how they're going to invade. Daenerys needs support.

For the Starks there are two fundamental areas of control after how the Battle of the Bastards played out, and one of them may be slightly tenuous. The North and the Vale of Arryn. I'm getting the slight feel that the people of the Vale may prefer them to Baelish, but that may remain to be seen. No matter what, given Baelish's ambitions regarding the South, he is at the least an ally, so the Vale is an ally.

The Targaryens certainly have an interesting situation on their hands for mounting Daenerys' invasion. Thanks to Cersei's politically questionable actions, House Tyrell and House Martell have allied themselves with Daenerys and give her an entire two regions of relatively secure land to put her forces down. This is more important than people give it credit for. Especially since historically House Martell wasn't exactly known for being sympathetic to Robert's rebellion anyway. On top of that, she will have a relatively secure fall back position in the Reach, one of Westeros' biggest breadbaskets. In the middle of Winter. This is more important than people think. Especially since the Riverlands have been utterly ravaged by war. Daenerys also made a partial political grab for the Iron Islands fleet as well. What can she do with that besides sheer troop transport. I imagine harassment of her enemies after troops are dropped off. Harassment of enemy navies so they can't move their own troops against her. And still, she can move her own troops around the shores of Westeros as she needs.

Of course we have to answer the question of the other half of the Iron Islands. They probably won't like being turned down in favor of those Danny chose, so she'll have at least one fleet bearing down on her. Probably. Remains to be seen if they're smart enough to ally with Lannister though. Theon's fleet will have a job regardless.

What's the other land we haven't specifically been in for quite a while? The Stormlands? Not since Melisandre raised some hell anyway and drove worthwhile people to Stannis. What remains of them anyway. Thank you for the genius moves Stannis.

The (Sorta) Bad Guys

Largely these are the people that started the story knowing what they do as a career and how to do it. Whether they do it well is debateabale. It's just a question of if they're still alive now in the TV show and I happen to be classifying them as worth talking about as an independant major character and not the Night's Watch.

Jaime Lannister - Jaime is the character with some interesting potential given the movement of other characters. Namely his Kingslayer resume. Will he move on Cersei or will he not? This is all a question regarding the fact that he has kinda sorta developed something of a noticeable conscience through the story, moving against his House politically regarding other major characters(see: Sansa). As well, we know specifically why he was willing to kill the King, so now, he's seen what Cersei's done. What will he end up be willing to do based on what she shows herself as in the future?

Cersei Lannister - For all of Cersei's well known faults she had one well known saving grace. For the children. And this time the last of the children died. Which means she's her own monster. She's going to make her own mistakes. Hell she was cutting off her own allies as she was trying to supposedly protect her own children and we saw how well that was going when she didn't have her father looking after her. She's likely to run the kingdom into the ground. Directly. Here's the thing. She wouldn't be the first crowned royalty to do so if I'm at all familiar with the world. What drove people like Jaime to the edge and over was the fact that the nuts are willing to blow things up. We'll see what she's willing to do in her own little madness.

Petyr Baelish - This is the guy that makes Sansa still a relevant power player in the North. She just got done out maneuvering him so Jon was on the throne but not her as Petyr wanted. But Petyr is one of the few questionable characters still on the board. And we all know that he's going to try to manipulate the North against the South whatever Jon's priorities are. Because it's been blatantly stated that the Iron Throne is Petyr's priority.

The (Mostly) Good Guys

Arya Stark - Arya is an interesting character now because she has demonstrably functionally finished her training. Not really because she has finished but just because she has shown she has and she's shown she doesn't care about their standards and is moving on with her life. More interestingly, the Faceless Men seem to be letting her, in spite of her knowledge. This raises questions that need addressing. Especially after we see that Arya uses their more hidden skills without guidance or known approval to kill to kill Walder Frey. Will she be "no one" after this? Does the Faceless God have his own buy-in in the situation with the Others. Just like Melisandre and the Red God. Or, now that she's demonstrated her abilities does anything and everything to do with her functionally disappear as you'd like to try to imply since it's not the Others charging south? Especially now with the clean slate there's room to adress these questions.

Sansa Stark - Sansa is one of the cooler characters in that she had a brutally abusive career, and yet managed to learn from it. She was also taught by Petyr Baelish a bit and learned. It all started when she wouldn't back her sister at the Inn and lost Lady for her troubles and her life basically went down hill with lesson after lesson after lesson delivered harshly and painfully. The question was always if she was learning. It all came to a head at the beginning of Season 6 when she was in a position to be moving on her own after breaking out of Winterfell. She started gathering allies and moving on the Boltons. What few allies of the North she could convince anyway. The free peoples and Jon Snow and those from the South were the bulk of her forces. Note, first person she convinces is Jon Snow after all. Them all and an ace in the hole that nobody but her knew was coming. And then her power play against Baelish so he couldn't use her against the South? Now that she's fully demonstrated her abilities against him she'll certainly be sidelined. Right?

Theon Greyjoy - Now Greyjoy. Greyjoy is an interesting character. He started interestingly loyal to the Starks then turned against them because his family pressured him to in spite of the somewhat intrinsically different values he was raised with from the age he was taken at. He raided the North. Then he was captured. He was literally broken by Bolten to the point he identified himself as a different person. Sansa saved him. He considers himself unworthy of Harren's Throne and supported his sister. A considerable development. He and his sister are supportying Dany in return for their own support for Harren's Throne. But you know, if we just, ignore that development... Depends on what you think they'll do with Dany's force.

Bran Stark - This kid literally starts the story getting his back broken and eventually goes into hiding. Then he travels Way Frakking North(TM) to learn after he figures out what he is. Now that in Season Six End(TM) he finally figures out how to do what he does without guidance he's going to get sidelined? No. You don't do this to a character just to throw him by the wayside. Just like Arya and Sansa won't get sidelined. This kid is going to have his own bit of work ahead of him, figuring out what I'll call the spiritual side of the coming war. The Septs aren't the only religion in the world. Hell, Melisandre demonstrated that well enough. The Guild of the Faceless Men demonstrate that as well. As soon as Bran comes into his skills we sideline him? No. Bad character usage. We bring him front and center by cleaning the slate. By killing people in the Battle of the Bastards and Blowing up the Temple. But nevermind that literary structure, the kid has figured out how to invade the past mind of a human being! And he is the one person on the planet that knows The Truth(TM) about Jon Snow that doesn't know it's supposed to be a god damned secret! Really? You think he's disappearing for the war?

Tyrion Lannister - Tyrion Lannister is a character that has either been ignored or manipulated towards his own troubles for the entire series. If he's done something right the credit has gone to someone else(see, Season 2 Siege of King's Landing for which the credit went to Tywin Lannister). Even after he killed his own father he had to spend quite some time earning his way into Dany's good graces, which is quite understandable. But once he did, she realized the treasure she had. Tyrion has finally made it to the top of his proverbial pile of dead bodies and has someone that will listen to him. Well, maybe you won't make the argument this guy will be sidelined since Dany is invading. Maybe. We'll see.

Jon Snow - Jon Snow is one of the most particularly interesting characters in the series in that any set lawyers would love to have him in a courtroom for if he's currently in breech of contract. I mean, he's died, but he's also alive. Best. Court. Case. Ever. Either way you're looking at the one person on the world with the functional grab at the title of "Lord" that knows what the real problem the world is facing. The Night's Watch didn't want him(he didn't care, functionally), he needed the North at his back, and he damn well decided he was going to fix that problem. The question here is if he's going to be manipulated South or if he's going to move forces north to the Wall to reinforce.

Daenerys Targaryen - Of course there's Dany. No character did more things wrong and more things right in the series than Dany. It's like...she had crap to learn from. And people to teach her. She might have also listened as well at certain times, forget her emotional outburts at ill timed moments that almost got her into trouble. She's one of those few people that's walking out of Season 6 in a better position than she went into the series. That's right. The Series. Actually, the only person. For all Jon is King of the North he all but sacrificed the principles of the Night's Watch. Sansa had to suffer what she suffered through. Cersei. Well...she's Cersei. She just screwed up. Dany. Dany learned. She learned to listen. When Tyrion said "You want to do this, yes. But don't. Do this instead." She did. And it worked. That's a scary thing in this world compared to various other leaders who have demonstrated their abilities. We'll see.

So, RedGuard. We've got roughly 13 hours left. A full 13 hours left. What characters are we going to cut off at the neck after fully bringing them to the apex of their abilities after cleaning the slate. That would be the purpose of cleaning the slate after all. So we could actually use the characters without interference from all the other minor characters after all.

Would we get rid of Bran?

Would we get rid of Sansa?

Maybe Theon?

How about Ayra?

I don't know. After six seasons of developing them and putting them through what I might call a legitimate writer's hell to bring them to a head and have them where they can fight for a legitimate bad guy for a legitimate good guy, whichever it happens to be, you think the hint is they'll just be sidelined?

Give me a better argument than "Oh sweet summer child". Because that one really sucks.

**Condottiere 40K** · July 04, 2016, 05:53 PM

Cersei is single, she may be willing to consort with a politically pragmatic prince.

**Gaidin** · July 04, 2016, 05:56 PM

Originally Posted by Condottiere 40K

Cersei is single, she may be willing to consort with a politically pragmatic prince.

Give her a minor house. Outside her realms even if that House has the sheer balls. See if it breaks my argument. Major Houses and Lands have already turned against her because she's just a political asshat.

**Condottiere 40K** · July 04, 2016, 06:01 PM

Cersei may see the need for a Royal Navy, and there someone who having missed out on the Dragon Lady, may be willing to take sloppy seconds with Maleficent.

**Gaidin** · July 04, 2016, 06:05 PM

Originally Posted by Condottiere 40K

Cersei may see the need for a Royal Navy, and there someone who having missed out on the Dragon Lady, may be willing to take sloppy seconds with Maleficent.

Cersei doesn't exactly have as good a master of the spies to tell them they have a hyuuuge fleet bearing down on them anymore.

**Gaidin** · July 04, 2016, 06:53 PM

Originally Posted by athanaric

I see your points and I mostly agree with them, what irked me most about the battle though was the fact that practically none of Jon Snow's faction - including himself! - was wearing helmets and shields. This is hugely unrealistic, as pointed out in the review by Matt Easton. I get that they do it with main characters for dramaturgical reasons (so that the audience can recognize them better, and can pick up on their emotions better), but this could be averted if those main characters just wore more distinctive clothing and/or armour. Or, you know, a distinctive helmet and shield. And it is possible - Karl Urban did it twice, in Lord of the Rings (which has Aragorn and Legolas running around without helmets, though) and in Dredd.
And there's no excuse for Jon's Northern allies not being equipped properly. Even the Wildlings should have had more spears and primitive shields.

You're reading too much into it.

You're missing the fact that we won't see any of this again because it's normally not necessary to explain this to the audience, visually or otherwise. When we need to explain it again, we will break out the pikes again and someone will have a distinct advantage in the fight. For the sake of the story mind you. Not for the sake of the people in the story. The story. And you won't know who. It could be the North. It could be the Central. It could be the South. It could even be the Unsullied. Because literally, until that shot, House Bolton didn't have the ability to use Pike's either. That's the nature of TV production.

Here's Bolton men carrying the standard 'fits in transit van' shortspear.

If they want to show a decisive advantage again, then pikes will come out again. Maybe. And you won't know who they'll come out again for. Or maybe it'll be armor. Or cavalry. Or Dragons. You just don't know who. Roll your dice. We won't see it until it's visually necessary to explain to the audience the advantage of one army over the other. And only for the sake of the story. And if it becomes necessary for the audience to understand the nature of such an advantage mind you. Bear in mind, we saw such an advantage in the very next episode when Dany wrecked a ship with her Dragons.

The books show no evidence that the Unsullied or other armies are so poorly trained in the spear department compared to the Westerosi. No dialogue says it. Saying 'the Unsullied aren't pikemen' based on visual evidence from the show is as valid as saying House Bolton aren't Pikemen based on visual evidence from Seasons 1 to 5 to Episode 9 of Season 6. Guess what now. Nothing tried to convey spears are longer in Westeros. Nothing tried to convey armor is more complete on one side.

Really. Complaining about one sides armor? You? A tv show?

You may as well try to argue that characters will lose arms because their armor doesn't cover their arms properly. Drawing prediction from props limitation is, well...pathetic. It's like you're trying to work out which side will win the war based on the footmen armors that are clearly designed to be as different as practical so as the audience can tell them apart.

Silly.

Come back to me when you're watching an actual documentary. Maybe I'll side with you.

**Mangalore** · July 05, 2016, 06:06 AM

Originally Posted by saxdude

...
Well because they were too busy honeymooning it up to care. "I will just defeat Robert at the Trident, and be named king my love", was the extent of their care for the political situation they left in the Kingdom, and being teenage starcrossed lovers doesn't do it as a justification for me, not as a reader, not as a noble, and certainly not as a peasant.

It makes her character pretty stupid. One expect some kind of response when your sibling and all your relatives join a rebel faction because of you or she was imprisoned in which case one would expect a different reaction when your brother shows up on your death bed.

**athanaric** · July 05, 2016, 09:06 AM

Originally Posted by Gaidin

You're reading too much into it.

You're missing the fact that we won't see any of this again because it's normally not necessary to explain this to the audience, visually or otherwise. When we need to explain it again, we will break out the pikes again and someone will have a distinct advantage in the fight. For the sake of the story mind you. Not for the sake of the people in the story. The story. And you won't know who. It could be the North. It could be the Central. It could be the South. It could even be the Unsullied. Because literally, until that shot, House Bolton didn't have the ability to use Pike's either. That's the nature of TV production.

So, in effect you're saying viewers are stupid, stop complaining about silly things like realism and authenticity.
It just so happens that I find the story a lot more immersive and the plot a lot more believable if the people in them act rationally and realistically.

Here's Bolton men carrying the standard 'fits in transit van' shortspear.

What's a shortspear?

If they want to show a decisive advantage again, then pikes will come out again. Maybe. And you won't know who they'll come out again for. Or maybe it'll be armor. Or cavalry. Or Dragons. You just don't know who. Roll your dice. We won't see it until it's visually necessary to explain to the audience the advantage of one army over the other. And only for the sake of the story. And if it becomes necessary for the audience to understand the nature of such an advantage mind you. Bear in mind, we saw such an advantage in the very next episode when Dany wrecked a ship with her Dragons.

So you're suggesting that a show should be exaggerating things like theatre does, or braindead movies like "300".

The books show no evidence that the Unsullied or other armies are so poorly trained in the spear department compared to the Westerosi. No dialogue says it. Saying 'the Unsullied aren't pikemen' based on visual evidence from the show is as valid as saying House Bolton aren't Pikemen based on visual evidence from Seasons 1 to 5 to Episode 9 of Season 6.

I didn't complain about the Unsullied, others did. Maybe you think I'm the same person as Pâsan, because we're both from Europe?

Guess what now. Nothing tried to convey spears are longer in Westeros. Nothing tried to convey armor is more complete on one side.

What's the point you're trying to make here?

Really. Complaining about one sides armor? You? A tv show?

Yes, why not? So far, GoT has been more historically accurate in their dresses and types of weapons and armour than most "historical" shows. That's part of its charm, actually. So I try to apply constructive criticism - because unlike others, they're not a lost cause.

You may as well try to argue that characters will lose arms because their armor doesn't cover their arms properly. Drawing prediction from props limitation is, well...pathetic. It's like you're trying to work out which side will win the war based on the footmen armors that are clearly designed to be as different as practical so as the audience can tell them apart.

Silly.

If your men don't wear shields and helmets in an open field battle, they'll get incapacitated or killed by arrows more. They're also more vulnerable in melee. So yeah, going full retard in terms of equipment does matter. Which by the way is also a problem with the Dothraki, although in their case it's more related to weapon choice and tactics. And pragmatism.
They could've shown Jon's side as wearing shields and helmets of mostly inferior quality compared to the Boltons. The viewers would still have been able to pick up on that.

Come back to me when you're watching an actual documentary. Maybe I'll side with you.

There's two kinds of documentaries, those with no budget and those that suck ass when it comes to realism. So normally, I don't even bother.