quote:

---

quote:

---

Point is, the more you deep dive into the background and the motivations of characters, the easier it is to predict things and, while that is awesome at times, it also takes away some of the suspense and fun. I see it both ways. My path is chosen, but I try not to say things like "Jon's father could actually be the Mad King" on the show only thread because I don't want to ruin that "surprise" factor for those who like still being surprised.


What the **** are you talking about?

---

agreed.

She spent a year in the Tower of Joy with the Mad King anywhere around and gave birth at the end of that time just prior to Ned arriving. How the heck could it be the Mad Kings kid?

Only Rhaegar and his knights were there and I doubt it was the knights. Rhaegar would have them killed if they touched her.

It's Rhaegar's kid with Lyanna. Any other conclusion is stupid.

---

I'm not a book reader so I can't confirm if she has or has not spent an entire year at the Tower of Joy being guarded by Sir Arthur Dayne. From the show's perspective, we know that Raegar kidnapped her and then the battle ensued. I'm still not quite sure why or how Ned's father and brother were killed by the Mad King, but it wouldn't be THAT far out of character for him to also rape Llyana, another Stark. From my perspective, Raegar may have feared for her safety and instructed his best men to hide her in the Tower of Joy and protect her (not knowing she was ever pregnant). The fact that Jon's name was purposely cut out and also that she didn't mention the father, just that he was Targeryan was a bit convenient.

IF that were the case, a few things would make quite a bit of sense. Aerys Targeryan had a history of troublesome pregnancies, I think two or three were still-born, another couple died as infants, Dany's mom died during childbirth. Furthermore, as the theory goes, he had an affinity for Tywin's wife and, coincidentally, she died during Tyrion's birth. It makes sense with some of the lines Tywin said to Tyrion such as "I took you in as if you were one of my own, and this is how you repay me" and on his death bed he says to Tyrion "you're no son of mine". If that were the case, then Tyrion, Dany, and Jon would all be half-brother's and half-sisters and would all come from mothers who died during child-birth.

Anyways, it's just a theory, but again that only proves my point that a happy-go-lucky show-only watcher likely doesn't want to be exposed to such a lavish and intricate theory as this one because they would rather be surprised than to say "oh man, I can't believe that one dude on the message boards was right after all!"

quote:

---

Who is she gonna summon? She isn't the queen in Dorne or the Reach, she's not the queen of the North, or apparently the Vale, because for some reason all those guys cheered for ******* Jon Snow, deserter of the Night's Watch. No idea who is in charge of the Riverlands since Frey was murdered, but I guess since we seem to be going on the assumption that it's whatever random character takes it or who we happen to have seen before it might be Brutus Tully. Or it could be Arya since it seems like you can just murder someone and everybody will throw down and support you after killing their Lord.

Anyway it's just a very entertaining soap opera at this point, you can pretty much stop assuming that things are gonna make any kind of political or historical sense.

---

Jon Snow deserter comment aside, this is fairly accurate. After a blatant terrorist attack on Kings Landing's most powerful aristocrats and religious leaders, Cersei is just able to claim the throne? No muss, no fuss? The show had gone to great lengths to depict how friendless she had become. Other than Franken-Mountain and Qyburn, why would anyone else support her claim after committing such an obvious atrocity? (That was my only quibble in an otherwise perfect season finale)

quote:

---

Who is she gonna summon? She isn't the queen in Dorne or the Reach, she's not the queen of the North, or apparently the Vale, because for some reason all those guys cheered for ******* Jon Snow, deserter of the Night's Watch. No idea who is in charge of the Riverlands since Frey was murdered, but I guess since we seem to be going on the assumption that it's whatever random character takes it or who we happen to have seen before it might be Brutus Tully. Or it could be Arya since it seems like you can just murder someone and everybody will throw down and support you after killing their Lord.

Anyway it's just a very entertaining soap opera at this point, you can pretty much stop assuming that things are gonna make any kind of political or historical sense.

---

For the record Jon Snow is not a deserter from the Watch. He died and his watch ended. The fact he was brought back to life doesn't make him an oath-breaker.

I thought about this too.

All the people who are supposed to be putting Cersi on trial, and anyone who might be a threat happen to get blown up, and a bunch of innocent people die in this attack. Then the king commits suicide, leaving Cersi to rule and nobody questions any of this (that we've seen)?

Maybe out of fear? Or we'll see this play out next season?

quote:

---

quote:

---

She still has a very powerful Lannister army, led by Jaime. She also still has the King's Guard and she has the royal decree. Sure, her power is much more limited than say, Joffrey's was, but if she sends for someone to come to King's Landing, they either come or they are outright rebelling from the crown and there are still a lot of people who frown upon that in the Seven Kingdoms.

---

The look by Jamie led me to believe he won't be backing her for much longer.
She has the respect/loyal command of no one except the King's Guard. The people of King's Landing have always hated her, which was very clear on her walk of atonement.

As for outright rebelling, basically the entire continent of Westeros is already in rebellion against the Lannisters with the exception of the Freys, who are basically toast at this point.

---

I totally agree. But much like the scene where Dany came back to Mereen under siege and we all just assumed that she ended the siege with Drogon and we didn't get to see it, I think they will actually take the time to play out how it happens. It may take 2-3 episodes for Jaime to finally stand up to her and THEN we'll see what kind of fall-out comes from that.

Anyways, I agree that she has less power than the previous 3 kings. That's a dead given, but if it took 10 episodes for Cerci to actually stand trial and it took 10 episodes for Jon to defeat Ramsey, then it makes some logical sense that it will take 7 episodes for Dany to make it to King's Landing and kill Cerci and then another 6 episodes for Dany and Jon to team up and kill the WWs.

quote:

---

For the record Jon Snow is not a deserter from the Watch. He died and his watch ended. The fact he was brought back to life doesn't make him an oath-breaker.

---

From the perspective of us, the viewer, sure. From the perspective of the dudes in that room, he's either an oathbreaker or a zombie, neither of which is a particularly settling option.

Yea yea, I saw that graphic about 10 minutes ago. Certainly before I made the original post and, you know what, perhaps it remains accurate. But some graphic buried in the HBO website isn't quite the same as explicitly saying it in the show (or the books for that matter). There was a time when that chart probably showed Ned as Jon's father too.

quote:

---

quote:

---

For the record Jon Snow is not a deserter from the Watch. He died and his watch ended. The fact he was brought back to life doesn't make him an oath-breaker.

---

From the perspective of us, the viewer, sure. From the perspective of the dudes in that room, he's either an oathbreaker or a zombie, neither of which is a particularly settling option.

---

Well we can argue about perceptions all day. But the fact remains, regardless of how others may perceive him, he is in fact, not a deserter. (In the same sense that Joffrey/Tommen was not a true king)

"Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come." -Night's Watch Oath

He is not a deserter nor an oath breaker.

"It shall not end until my death" - he died so his watch ended.

"I shall live and die at my post" - fulfilled

"I pledge my life and honor to the nights watch" - oath kept

Not to mention he is still trying to help the nights watch by gathering men to fight the white walkers.

quote:

---

quote:

---

I'm not a book reader...

---

...but you know all that crap about Aerys that isn't in the show?

---

I frequent this thread, don't I? I said that in terms of not being able to deny or confirm the evidence that was given me.

Y'all, I don't THINK that Aerys is Jon's dad. I just used that theory as an example of a theory that the show-only people probably don't want to be exposed to. This is getting ridiculous, some of y'all are so in love with R+L=J that you're gathering a mob to come after me!

The arrows need to be consistent on that chart. For some parent lines it points to the parent. On some it points to the child.

quote:

---

Y'all, I don't THINK that Aerys is Jon's dad. I just used that theory as an example of a theory that the show-only people probably don't want to be exposed to. This is getting ridiculous, some of y'all are so in love with R+L=J that you're gathering a mob to come after me!

---

Ok, my bad. To be fair, there have been a number of stupid theories that people deserve to be gone after with a mob.

And I don't give two sh_ts about what show watchers want, especially in this thread.

quote:

---

So you think Jon is a deserter? That's cute.

---

Ummm, I don't think Jon is a deserter....because I watched the show. Do the other characters around westeros know he isn't a deserter because they watched the reruns or on their DVR too?

Then again the maesters who send and receive ravens all over the kingdom presumably including many from Lord Commander Jon Snow, never bothered to send that little tidbit back to HQ so maybe it's not even widely known that Jon Snow was ever even in the Night's watch with the logic of this show.

Guys, go watch "After the Thrones" where Jason Conception, who is considered one of HBO's lead book commentators discusses this theory. It isn't some bull**** crap pulled out of left field. You're telling me some chart buried in the HBO website is more valid than his opinion?

quote:

---

quote:

---

So you think Jon is a deserter? That's cute.

---

I don't because I watched the show. Do the other characters around westeros know he isn't a deserter because they watched the reruns on their DVR?

Then again the maesters who send and receive ravens all over the kingdom presumably including many from Lord Commander Jon Snow, never bothered to send that little tidbit back to HQ so maybe it's not even widely known that Jon Snow was ever even in the Night's watch with the logic of this show.

---

Ok, I get what you're saying. The show has been rather nonchalant about Jon coming back to life. I have to think most of the house lords know he was in the watch, b/c he sent out those letters asking for help against the wildling army, to which Stannis was the only one to answer.

So, the show has either taken the approach of everyone knows why he left and are cool with him being alive, or that no one cares he deserted. Probably one of those, "we don't really want to waste time on this" decisions.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Who is she gonna summon? She isn't the queen in Dorne or the Reach, she's not the queen of the North, or apparently the Vale, because for some reason all those guys cheered for ******* Jon Snow, deserter of the Night's Watch. No idea who is in charge of the Riverlands since Frey was murdered, but I guess since we seem to be going on the assumption that it's whatever random character takes it or who we happen to have seen before it might be Brutus Tully. Or it could be Arya since it seems like you can just murder someone and everybody will throw down and support you after killing their Lord.

Anyway it's just a very entertaining soap opera at this point, you can pretty much stop assuming that things are gonna make any kind of political or historical sense.

---

Jon Snow deserter comment aside, this is fairly accurate. After a blatant terrorist attack on Kings Landing's most powerful aristocrats and religious leaders, Cersei is just able to claim the throne? No muss, no fuss? The show had gone to great lengths to depict how friendless she had become. Other than Franken-Mountain and Qyburn, why would anyone else support her claim after committing such an obvious atrocity? (That was my only quibble in an otherwise perfect season finale)

---

I get that and I thought about it.

First, some time has passed between the Sept blowing up and her coronation - she has different outfits on. Not only that but Jamie also is wearing different armor than when he showed up and saw the destruction from the hill.

So I'm quite certain that he and Cersei have talked. He isn't happy about it all. But with the KL forces at his disposal we can assume that gave Cersei the military backing she needed to claim the throne and enforce her will.

In lieu of anyone else to rule Jamie would defer to her, at least in the interim. At least dramatically its the best thing. So potentially a lot went on behind the scenes that we were not shown but can assume for now.


Oh and one more thing......other than Qyburn.....who knows Cersei did it? She could blame it on Pycelle and/or Lancel. Perhaps thats why they made sure they were down below.

quote:

---

This is the spoiler/book thread. I really don't care what someone who only watches the show might think. And even then, anyone who just watches the show that thinks Aerys could be the father probably doesn't know the family structure of the Targaryens. One look at the simple facts:

• Mad King had a son
• That son was Rhaegar
• Rhaegar openly flirted with Lyanna at a famoust tournament
• Rhaegar "kidnapped" Lyanna
• Lyanna subsequently died in child labor

(Those are all documented plot points in the show.)


How anyone could see those dots and connect them to "Aerys is the father" means the viewer either didn't pay attention, or is mis-remembering the fact that Rhaegar and Aerys are 2 different people.

---

I agree! That's my whole point! There is absolutely no reason a show-only watcher would think it is Aerys! And if it turned out to be, then that would be quite a surprise to a show-only watcher!

Edit: Just to clarify, I only brought up this theory in the discussion of why the show-only thread was so heated about keeping non-show information off of the thread. I completely agree that it doesn't seem anywhere likely, based on what we know from the books.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Who is she gonna summon? She isn't the queen in Dorne or the Reach, she's not the queen of the North, or apparently the Vale, because for some reason all those guys cheered for ******* Jon Snow, deserter of the Night's Watch. No idea who is in charge of the Riverlands since Frey was murdered, but I guess since we seem to be going on the assumption that it's whatever random character takes it or who we happen to have seen before it might be Brutus Tully. Or it could be Arya since it seems like you can just murder someone and everybody will throw down and support you after killing their Lord.

Anyway it's just a very entertaining soap opera at this point, you can pretty much stop assuming that things are gonna make any kind of political or historical sense.

---

Jon Snow deserter comment aside, this is fairly accurate. After a blatant terrorist attack on Kings Landing's most powerful aristocrats and religious leaders, Cersei is just able to claim the throne? No muss, no fuss? The show had gone to great lengths to depict how friendless she had become. Other than Franken-Mountain and Qyburn, why would anyone else support her claim after committing such an obvious atrocity? (That was my only quibble in an otherwise perfect season finale)

---

I get that and I thought about it.

First, some time has passed between the Sept blowing up and her coronation - she has different outfits on. Not only that but Jamie also is wearing different armor than when he showed up and saw the destruction from the hill.

So I'm quite certain that he and Cersei have talked. He isn't happy about it all. But with the KL forces at his disposal we can assume that gave Cersei the military backing she needed to claim the throne and enforce her will.

In lieu of anyone else to rule Jamie would defer to her, at least in the interim. At least dramatically its the best thing. So potentially a lot went on behind the scenes that we were not shown but can assume for now.


Oh and one more thing......other than Qyburn.....who knows Cersei did it? She could blame it on Pycelle and/or Lancel. Perhaps thats why they made sure they were down below.

---

I thought she was wearing the same Romulan cosplay with hairdo on coronation day that she wore on the day of her trial actually.

Did Lyanna have a massive wound to her leg in the shot with young Ned? Or was that the blood from childbirth?

quote:

---

Seriously, y'all are going to sit here and crucify me for bringing up an admittedly wild and unlikely theory when some of y'all spent two-three weeks arguing about the Fight Club theory for Arya, the "It was really Jaqen all along" and "no it was an actress she paid!".

There are plenty of crazy theories on this thread. I hardly think this is the most outlandish.

---

I'm not crucifying you. I'm refuting your points as you bring them up.

(I also never supported Arya fight club)

quote:

---

quote:

---

Seriously, y'all are going to sit here and crucify me for bringing up an admittedly wild and unlikely theory when some of y'all spent two-three weeks arguing about the Fight Club theory for Arya, the "It was really Jaqen all along" and "no it was an actress she paid!".

There are plenty of crazy theories on this thread. I hardly think this is the most outlandish.

---

As I said, those stupid theories got plenty of ridicule, and deservedly so.

---

Haha ok good point.

The dresses are different. I think the show opened with her getting dressed in her coronation outfit, then time jumped to her watching for the sept to blow up, and she's in a different dress. Confusing opening, to say the least.

quote:

---

quote:

---

This is the spoiler/book thread. I really don't care what someone who only watches the show might think. And even then, anyone who just watches the show that thinks Aerys could be the father probably doesn't know the family structure of the Targaryens. One look at the simple facts:

• Mad King had a son
• That son was Rhaegar
• Rhaegar openly flirted with Lyanna at a famoust tournament
• Rhaegar "kidnapped" Lyanna
• Lyanna subsequently died in child labor

(Those are all documented plot points in the show.)


How anyone could see those dots and connect them to "Aerys is the father" means the viewer either didn't pay attention, or is mis-remembering the fact that Rhaegar and Aerys are 2 different people.

---

I agree! That's my whole point! There is absolutely no reason a show-only watcher would think it is Aerys! And if it turned out to be, then that would be quite a surprise to a show-only watcher!

---

Ok whatever.

nobody here cares whether show only watchers are shocked or not - thats their problem and their choice.

So can we stop talking about asinine theories JUST as an example of what show watchers might be shocked about if it came out of the blue. It's pointless. This is the book readers thread.

And regardless whether someone does it intentionally/accidentally or whatever that theory probably will pop up over there (if it has not already) because notoriously THEY have NO F-ING CLUE who characters are especially ones rarely mentioned or shown - someone will talk about Aerys when they mean Rhaegar, etc. and then they'll debate that (and you can't tell them why it's impossible because thats book info).

quote:

---

quote:

---

Who is she gonna summon? She isn't the queen in Dorne or the Reach, she's not the queen of the North, or apparently the Vale, because for some reason all those guys cheered for ******* Jon Snow, deserter of the Night's Watch. No idea who is in charge of the Riverlands since Frey was murdered, but I guess since we seem to be going on the assumption that it's whatever random character takes it or who we happen to have seen before it might be Brutus Tully. Or it could be Arya since it seems like you can just murder someone and everybody will throw down and support you after killing their Lord.

Anyway it's just a very entertaining soap opera at this point, you can pretty much stop assuming that things are gonna make any kind of political or historical sense.

---

Jon Snow deserter comment aside, this is fairly accurate. After a blatant terrorist attack on Kings Landing's most powerful aristocrats and religious leaders, Cersei is just able to claim the throne? No muss, no fuss? The show had gone to great lengths to depict how friendless she had become. Other than Franken-Mountain and Qyburn, why would anyone else support her claim after committing such an obvious atrocity? (That was my only quibble in an otherwise perfect season finale)

---

I'd be curious to know if this is just a case of her having the highest claim to the throne after all Baratheons have been wiped out? Or is it similar to a hostile takeover where the person who wipes out the previous royalty siezes the crown?

quote:

---

Did Lyanna have a massive wound to her leg in the shot with young Ned? Or was that the blood from childbirth?

---

Childbirth

Smokey, I think the biggest issue that people are having with you in this discussion is that it appears it was you that first brought up the theory of Aerys being Jon's dad:

quote:

---

Point is, the more you deep dive into the background and the motivations of characters, the easier it is to predict things and, while that is awesome at times, it also takes away some of the suspense and fun. I see it both ways. My path is chosen, but I try not to say things like "Jon's father could actually be the Mad King" on the show only thread because I don't want to ruin that "surprise" factor for those who like still being surprised.

---

Even though you were trying to make a point about losing some surprise factor by reading about theories, or others posting about theories, it came across like it was your theory.

quote:

---

The dresses are different. I think the show opened with her getting dressed in her coronation outfit, then time jumped to her watching for the sept to blow up, and she's in a different dress. Confusing opening, to say the least.

---

No the show opened with her getting dressed presumably for the TRIAL. But in reality she knew what was happening. And she is wearing that outfit later when torturing Septa Unella after the explosion. but she is wearing something different at the Coronation which might be days or even weeks later.

quote:

---

Oh and one more thing......other than Qyburn.....who knows Cersei did it? She could blame it on Pycelle and/or Lancel. Perhaps thats why they made sure they were down below.

---

Who would do this?
Who had the means to carry it out?
Who had the most to gain?
Why was Tommen and Cersei absent?

The answers to those questions only lead to Cersei. They may not have an corroborating witnesses, but the blame would be impossible to pass off.