Board 8 > Game of Thrones Season 8: Topic 5

(+) Yeah! (+)

someone who commits war crimes may commit more war crimes, but it's disingenuous to say that all those crimes are the same

that's like saying that since jon executed olly, he has demonstrated the capacity to kill kids, and using that as justification for him slaughtering hordes of kids in king's landing

he's half targaryen after all
---

SeabassDebeste posted...

someone who commits war crimes may commit more war crimes, but it's disingenuous to say that all those crimes are the same

that's like saying that since jon executed olly, he has demonstrated the capacity to kill kids, and using that as justification for him slaughtering hordes of kids in king's landing

he's half targaryen after all

Jon showed remorse for executing Olly (who presumably received some sort of trial, given that they make a huge deal about the people Dany executes not receiving a trial).

Dany shows no remorse for executing ________.

Completely different characterization

Yeah let's focus on getting our own countries in 2019 to follow the geneva convention before applying it to fictional monarchies
---

ned doesn't grant a trial to the night's watch deserter in literally episode 1 and he's literally the standard of morality in the show's universe. robb doesn't grant a trial to lord karstark and it's tragic only because it's a shit political move to him. the tarlys are executed for treason, which they are literally in the process of committing when dany executes them.
---

Nanahara715 posted...

Jon showed remorse for executing Olly (who presumably received some sort of trial, given that they make a huge deal about the people Dany executes not receiving a trial).

Why would you possibly assume Olly was give a trial when it wasn't shown on screen and Jon never gave Janos Slynt a trial either.

And uh Geneva Conventions aside...

SeabassDebeste posted...

someone who commits war crimes may commit more war crimes, but it's disingenuous to say that all those crimes are the same

that's like saying that since jon executed olly, he has demonstrated the capacity to kill kids, and using that as justification for him slaughtering hordes of kids in king's landing

he's half targaryen after all

This is obviously the key point. Dany had, up to this point done plenty of bad things including murdering enemies. Something in character for her to have done, with the exact same set up, was to burn all the Lannister army men that had surrendered. That is a stretch compared to what she has done before, but is a natural continuation.

Murdering all of the children jumps over several key steps of her character development. It was an active choice she made. Again, if her second dragon dies here after what was supposed to be a truce, then I could see her losing all restraint and just massacring everyone. They had some pieces here, but they did not set it up in the right way.

Which, again, is why I am convinced this is the actual ending to the books but they just didn't know quite how to get there.
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Murdering all of the children jumps over several key steps of her character development

This is just not true though, unless you missed the steps in the previous episodes where she's like "I need to burn those kids to get the throne"
---

I'm also becoming increasingly convinced that Jon dies at the start of the next episode, not Dany.

The entire preview was Dany and Arya focused. Arya is the one who kills Dany. At this point, considering what she's done, there is no way Jon is left alive. It makes no sense for her to massacre an entire town and then not immediately kill the dude with the better claim to the throne than her.

Arya has to be down here for a reason, and she didn't kill Cersei and just spent the episode running around looking scared. The ending of the episode, with her on the clearly symbolic white horse, is setting up something. And Jon has been utterly useless for the larger part of two seasons now.

I think Jon dies, Arya gets her revenge on Dany, and then I dunno what happens to Drogon. Flies away to retire at the Summer Isles maybe.
---

Even if they didn't want her to have 2 dragons for the finale, they could have had Euron cheap shot a dragon earlier during a truce moment. Remove missandei from the equation and instead have them just meet to discuss surrender. Have Euron take out a dragon at that point when it is supposed to be a truce or when they are leaving.

Then it would give Dany reason to doubt the bells as an actual surrender and not just another chance to fuck her over

SeabassDebeste posted...

ned doesn't grant a trial to the night's watch deserter in literally episode 1 and he's literally the standard of morality in the show's universe. robb doesn't grant a trial to lord karstark and it's tragic only because it's a shit political move to him. the tarlys are executed for treason, which they are literally in the process of committing when dany executes them.

Literally what.

Dany is not in any position of lordship over them. Them not kneeling could be any number of things but it sure as shit can't be called treason.

Will literally pleads guilty to desertion of the NW which he knows carries a penalty of death.

Karstark is a vassal to Robb (not a POW or conquered individual) and admits his crimes.

Suprak the Stud posted...

I'm also becoming increasingly convinced that Jon dies at the start of the next episode, not Dany.

The entire preview was Dany and Arya focused. Arya is the one who kills Dany. At this point, considering what she's done, there is no way Jon is left alive. It makes no sense for her to massacre an entire town and then not immediately kill the dude with the better claim to the throne than her.

Arya has to be down here for a reason, and she didn't kill Cersei and just spent the episode running around looking scared. The ending of the episode, with her on the clearly symbolic white horse, is setting up something. And Jon has been utterly useless for the larger part of two seasons now.

I think Jon dies, Arya gets her revenge on Dany, and then I dunno what happens to Drogon. Flies away to retire at the Summer Isles maybe.

I dont know if this counts as a spoiler, but Kit Harrington did an interview where he was asked about his final scene, and he basically said It was like having your skin ripped off, and then I had to watch Maisie shoot and it was surreal.

So, that could be nothing, but also
---

ShatteredElysium posted...

Even if they didn't want her to have 2 dragons for the finale, they could have had Euron cheap shot a dragon earlier during a truce moment. Remove missandei from the equation and instead have them just meet to discuss surrender. Have Euron take out a dragon at that point when it is supposed to be a truce or when they are leaving.

Then it would give Dany reason to doubt the bells as an actual surrender and not just another chance to fuck her over

I'd like this variation too!
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

I'm also becoming increasingly convinced that Jon dies at the start of the next episode, not Dany.

The entire preview was Dany and Arya focused. Arya is the one who kills Dany. At this point, considering what she's done, there is no way Jon is left alive. It makes no sense for her to massacre an entire town and then not immediately kill the dude with the better claim to the throne than her.

Arya has to be down here for a reason, and she didn't kill Cersei and just spent the episode running around looking scared. The ending of the episode, with her on the clearly symbolic white horse, is setting up something. And Jon has been utterly useless for the larger part of two seasons now.

I think Jon dies, Arya gets her revenge on Dany, and then I dunno what happens to Drogon. Flies away to retire at the Summer Isles maybe.

I dont know if this counts as a spoiler, but Kit Harrington did an interview where he was asked about his final scene, and he basically said It was like having your skin ripped off, and then I had to watch Maisie shoot and it was surreal.

So, that could be nothing, but also

Huh. That would certainly lead credence to my theory then!

Like they can't have Jon kill Dany at this point. There is no way they could write it so it could make sense. And they can't have Dany let Jon live. Again, there is no way that would possibly occur based on last episode.

Arya makes far more sense, and there is a shot with her getting close to Dany's army in the last episode and glaring at (what I assume is her) menacingly. This would make way more sense than what she did in the fight against the Night King. She's trained to be a ninja assassin, and would be the one that can get close to Dany without drawing suspicion. She just needs to take someone's face.
---

Jon gets killed by someone else, Arya takes his face
---

...actually.

"It was like having your skin ripped off"

Could Arya be wearing Jon's face? Would he be that literal about it? That would certainly be one way to catch Dany off guard.
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

I'm also becoming increasingly convinced that Jon dies at the start of the next episode, not Dany.

The entire preview was Dany and Arya focused. Arya is the one who kills Dany. At this point, considering what she's done, there is no way Jon is left alive. It makes no sense for her to massacre an entire town and then not immediately kill the dude with the better claim to the throne than her.

Arya has to be down here for a reason, and she didn't kill Cersei and just spent the episode running around looking scared. The ending of the episode, with her on the clearly symbolic white horse, is setting up something. And Jon has been utterly useless for the larger part of two seasons now.

I think Jon dies, Arya gets her revenge on Dany, and then I dunno what happens to Drogon. Flies away to retire at the Summer Isles maybe.

I dont know if this counts as a spoiler, but Kit Harrington did an interview where he was asked about his final scene, and he basically said It was like having your skin ripped off, and then I had to watch Maisie shoot and it was surreal.

So, that could be nothing, but also

Huh. That would certainly lead credence to my theory then!

Like they can't have Jon kill Dany at this point. There is no way they could write it so it could make sense. And they can't have Dany let Jon live. Again, there is no way that would possibly occur based on last episode.

Arya makes far more sense, and there is a shot with her getting close to Dany's army in the last episode and glaring at (what I assume is her) menacingly. This would make way more sense than what she did in the fight against the Night King. She's trained to be a ninja assassin, and would be the one that can get close to Dany without drawing suspicion. She just needs to take someone's face.

So Arya takes Jon's face, catches Dany off guard cause she already killed him.
---

Damn it suprak
---

My current theory is that she kills Grey Worm, takes his face, and then goes to kill Dany.

I also kind of think that Jon would get burned alive and thus has no face to take!

But Tony's suggestion is interesting based on what Kit said.
---

My only hesitance on Tony's theory is that Dany has 100% been all about burning people alive. It is literally her solution to everything. I can't imagine a scenario where she is like "ok guy take Jon Snow and just stab him to death I've got other things to do".
---

Grey Worm on the throne with Bran as his hand
---

Obellisk posted...

Damn it suprak

Tony posted first so you were DOUBLE beaten.
---

Nanahara715 posted...

SeabassDebeste posted...

ned doesn't grant a trial to the night's watch deserter in literally episode 1 and he's literally the standard of morality in the show's universe. robb doesn't grant a trial to lord karstark and it's tragic only because it's a shit political move to him. the tarlys are executed for treason, which they are literally in the process of committing when dany executes them.

Literally what.

Dany is not in any position of lordship over them. Them not kneeling could be any number of things but it sure as shit can't be called treason.

Will literally pleads guilty to desertion of the NW which he knows carries a penalty of death.

Karstark is a vassal to Robb (not a POW or conquered individual) and admits his crimes.

*adding in that Karstark was executed for executing POWs, so there's credence that this is a thing in Westeros.

Suprak the Stud posted...

My only hesitance on Tony's theory is that Dany has 100% been all about burning people alive. It is literally her solution to everything. I can't imagine a scenario where she is like "ok guy take Jon Snow and just stab him to death I've got other things to do".

Jon is going to be immune to fire because despite insistence of no more miracles we are going to get yet another miracle.

Oh because he is half Targaryen. Duh. I hadn't considered that.

I do think it would be a bit of a lame move for them to be like "OH WOW JON SURVIVED A DRAGON BLAST oh wait they just stabbed him yawn".
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Oh because he is half Targaryen. Duh. I hadn't considered that.

I do think it would be a bit of a lame move for them to be like "OH WOW JON SURVIVED A DRAGON BLAST oh wait they just stabbed him yawn".

I mean, I can't think that Dany sits there thinking that she is even going to be able to roast Jon in the first place- she knows he's a Targ, and trying to burn him just confirms he's a Targ and gives his claim more credence than "Sam and Bran say he's a Targ."

Karstark wasnt executed for killing pows he was executed for disobeying Robs orders and killing them anyway.

I thought her invulnerability to fire is specific to her and not all Targs
---

Viserys was a true Targ and extreme heat sure stopped him.

and his claim has already spread to most lords in the realms by now since Varys probably sent a bunch of pigeons before dying

I think his word at least means something since he's known for knowing things
---

PerfectChaosZ posted...

Karstark wasnt executed for killing pows he was executed for disobeying Robs orders and killing them anyway.

Yeah, Robb's orders to not kill POWs.

Nanahara715 posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Oh because he is half Targaryen. Duh. I hadn't considered that.

I do think it would be a bit of a lame move for them to be like "OH WOW JON SURVIVED A DRAGON BLAST oh wait they just stabbed him yawn".

I mean, I can't think that Dany sits there thinking that she is even going to be able to roast Jon in the first place- she knows he's a Targ, and trying to burn him just confirms he's a Targ and gives his claim more credence than "Sam and Bran say he's a Targ."

Yeah but these are the same people that sent Winterfell's women and children down to the crypts.

Also Jon's not immune to fire. He burned his hand in the first season/book.

...but then these are the same writers that sent Winterfell's women and children down to the crypts... "Dragons are different!"
---

the crypt shouldn't have had anything to resurrect anyway since doesn't everyone in the north burn the bodies of the dead?
---

Nanahara715 posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Oh because he is half Targaryen. Duh. I hadn't considered that.

I do think it would be a bit of a lame move for them to be like "OH WOW JON SURVIVED A DRAGON BLAST oh wait they just stabbed him yawn".

I mean, I can't think that Dany sits there thinking that she is even going to be able to roast Jon in the first place- she knows he's a Targ, and trying to burn him just confirms he's a Targ and gives his claim more credence than "Sam and Bran say he's a Targ."

Also a very good point. So maybe Dany would just be smart enough not to burn him.

At the same time though Viserys very much did burn and I've never been fully convinced that not burning isn't just a Dany thing. It has been too long since I read the books though so maybe the exact mechanics of which Targs are burnable and which are not.

Although, to your point, since Dany knows she doesn't burn she would be an idiot to try and burn Jon regardless since she wouldn't be sure of it. So you are probably right anyway!
---

mnkboy907 posted...

Nanahara715 posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Oh because he is half Targaryen. Duh. I hadn't considered that.

I do think it would be a bit of a lame move for them to be like "OH WOW JON SURVIVED A DRAGON BLAST oh wait they just stabbed him yawn".

I mean, I can't think that Dany sits there thinking that she is even going to be able to roast Jon in the first place- she knows he's a Targ, and trying to burn him just confirms he's a Targ and gives his claim more credence than "Sam and Bran say he's a Targ."

Yeah but these are the same people that sent Winterfell's women and children down to the crypts.

Also Jon's not immune to fire. He burned his hand in the first season/book.

...but then these are the same writers that sent Winterfell's women and children down to the crypts... "Dragons are different!"

Ok cool that was the sort of thing I was trying to think back to but couldn't remember.
---

Which was a specific special order since they were going to trade them, not that killing POWs is typically considered universally bad in Westeros.

Oh and no Targs are immune to fire at all in the books.

GranzonEx posted...

the crypt shouldn't have had anything to resurrect anyway since doesn't everyone in the north burn the bodies of the dead?

Not the Starks. That was why it was a big deal that Ned's body was returned and was ultimate insult to toss Catelyn into the moat. Starks go into the crypt

Burning bodies might even be a night watch wall thing. I can't remember

Nanahara715 posted...

SeabassDebeste posted...

ned doesn't grant a trial to the night's watch deserter in literally episode 1 and he's literally the standard of morality in the show's universe. robb doesn't grant a trial to lord karstark and it's tragic only because it's a shit political move to him. the tarlys are executed for treason, which they are literally in the process of committing when dany executes them.

Literally what.

Dany is not in any position of lordship over them. Them not kneeling could be any number of things but it sure as shit can't be called treason.

Will literally pleads guilty to desertion of the NW which he knows carries a penalty of death.

Karstark is a vassal to Robb (not a POW or conquered individual) and admits his crimes.

Tarlys are vassals of the Tyrells, who swore service to Dany.
---

Aegon the Conquerer burned Harren the Black and every member of his entire family in their castle for treason before the seven kingdoms were even formed.

This discussion just reminds me of how weird Dany's entire storyline is.

Westeros has been ruled by the (outsider) Targaryens since the Seven Kingdoms were formed. Robert Baratheon and his allies deposed the king and set up the first government ever formed outside of the Targaryen family. Now Dany has come to "liberate" everyone.

How many heroic liberators have you heard of being from a despotic line of rulers? If anything, the Lannisters were the liberators!
---

HanOfTheNekos posted...

Nanahara715 posted...

SeabassDebeste posted...

ned doesn't grant a trial to the night's watch deserter in literally episode 1 and he's literally the standard of morality in the show's universe. robb doesn't grant a trial to lord karstark and it's tragic only because it's a shit political move to him. the tarlys are executed for treason, which they are literally in the process of committing when dany executes them.

Literally what.

Dany is not in any position of lordship over them. Them not kneeling could be any number of things but it sure as shit can't be called treason.

Will literally pleads guilty to desertion of the NW which he knows carries a penalty of death.

Karstark is a vassal to Robb (not a POW or conquered individual) and admits his crimes.

Tarlys are vassals of the Tyrells, who swore service to Dany.

Except the Tyrells are dead by that point, I'd argue there's a higher oath to uphold to the crown, and Dany doesn't know this anyways because she didn't know who Randyl Tarly even was, so it's immaterial to her motives anyways.

PerfectChaosZ posted...

Aegon the Conquerer burned Harren the Black and every member of his entire family in their castle for treason before the seven kingdoms were even formed.

I mean, he can call it "Treason" in the same way I can call a cat a hole in the ground

Just saying theres historical precedent in universe for it so to the characters it would track.

In the books it hasnt been tested but Martin has said Danys survival in that first burning was very specifically a magic thing and not a general fire immunity.
---

https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Great_Masters

Oh yeah if you kept wanting to say the literal Masters werent all slave owners. What would they be the masters of? Just think logically. -_-

https://docdro.id/iCzcdBJ

I made a document that showcased the episode contents if they would strictly follow the books. I was pretty surprised to see how neatly it fitted for those early seasons, when I always felt only season 1 was truly faithful to the book.
---

Robert Baratheon actually has distant Targaryen ancestry they used to give him a REALLY shitty claim to the throne. Targaryen rule was technically still in effect until Cersei put Joffery on!
---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Robert Baratheon actually has distant Targaryen ancestry they used to give him a REALLY shitty claim to the throne. Targaryen rule was technically still in effect until Cersei put herself on!

FTFY - despite their true heritage, Joffrey and Tommen were still ruling as Roberts children.
---

JonThePenguin posted...

In the books it hasnt been tested but Martin has said Danys survival in that first burning was very specifically a magic thing and not a general fire immunity.

It was supposed to be a one time miracle but now we know it is happening at least one more time.

You know, I could buy the explanation that Dany actually did horrifically burn to death, but R'hllor brought her back because she had a role to play in ending the Long Night.

Maybe he even brought her back immediately and she burned again and he brought her back again and it just repeated all night long until the fire went out.
---

she was shown to be immune to fire/heat in the first season when she picked up a dragon egg that was resting in hot coals, one of the girls attending her quickly snatched it away and was burned as a result
---

Yeah, that scene was an invention of the show. I'm just talking about how apparently her surviving was a magical miracle in the books.
---