I wasn't speaking on that topic, just many, many discussions on here in general.

But to be fair (to be faiiiiiiiiiiiiir-- ), it can make sense, be referred to in books & the show in the past, and the result can still be lazy writing and stupid.

(no, I don't have an issue with that specific point)

aTmAg said:

---

Icecream_Ag said:

---

King tut ruled for a decade an was 19 when he died, yet a 10 year old head of house in a fantasy show defies reality

---

From what I remember, he didn't run crap. His advisers did.

---

Same for GOT.

The kids don't run crap.

You're acting like these kid rulers on GOT are actually ruling because Joffrey pulled a fast one that cost Ned his head and because Little Lady Mormont, who heads a small/decimated house, seems to have more liberty to make her own decisions, which is not the norm. At all.

I knew I liked you for a reason. I like the LK reference. I also like your name. Strange

It's also silly to expect that a small manor house would have had the same apparatus as an absolute monarchy in a stable dynasty.

redline248 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Icecream_Ag said:

---

King tut ruled for a decade an was 19 when he died, yet a 10 year old head of house in a fantasy show defies reality

---

From what I remember, he didn't run crap. His advisers did.

---

You remember? Damn, you're old.

---

I'm old. But not THAT old. I meant from what I remember when reading about him. This is from memory, so it may be wrong:

His predecessor eliminated a bunch of the gods and dictated everybody woship one. That pissed off a bunch of high ranking dudes. He died or whatever and Tut became king. Tut was young easy to manipulate and the advisers were able to get him to agree to bring the old gods back, trash his predecessor and whatnot. His elaborate tomb was basically a "thanks" for being such a "great leader" because of going against his predecessor.

Something like that.

OldShadeOfBlue said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

smokeythebear said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

smokeythebear said:

---

It doesn't matter what you would do, it only matters what precedence the show sets. When Joffrey takes over the throne for himself and Bran is shown making decisions in Winterfell (with the advice of Maester Lewin) then it absolutely makes sense that young kids would be the head of their household in other houses.

---

The fact that any of that happens is a flaw in the writing. I don't know who. Since Ned Stark was supposed to be Joffrey's regent (and Cersie stole that), I'm inclined too blame HBO.

---

Except that precedence was very clearly set by the books...

---

Which character(s)?

---

It's not a flaw in the writing just because it's not the way you'd do things. You're saying a kid being the Lord or leader of a house doesn't fall inline with the rules of the show when it in fact there are quite a few examples of this in the show and books.

---

I am not saying it doesn't fall in line with the rules the show. I'm saying that that aspect of the rules is idiotic. Would you trust your 10 year old kid to run your house? No? Then why would you trust him/her to run your city? You wouldn't.

And that's not even going into the ridiculous eye stabbing scene.


Nevertheless, that's just one flaw in the show. I still like it, and think Sundays episode was great. I'm not like Swag who is criticizing every last aspect of it.

bonfarr said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Urban Ag said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

smokeythebear said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

smokeythebear said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

smokeythebear said:

---

It doesn't matter what you would do, it only matters what precedence the show sets. When Joffrey takes over the throne for himself and Bran is shown making decisions in Winterfell (with the advice of Maester Lewin) then it absolutely makes sense that young kids would be the head of their household in other houses.

---

The fact that any of that happens is a flaw in the writing. I don't know who. Since Ned Stark was supposed to be Joffrey's regent (and Cersie stole that), I'm inclined too blame HBO.

---

Except that precedence was very clearly set by the books...

---

Which character(s)?

---

Joffrey, Tommen, and Bran.

---

Cersie was the regent for Joffrey and Tomnen. I forget on Bran.

One issue I have is that the regent seems to have no power in GoT. In reality, a young king wouldn't be able to defy the regent and start a war by executing somebody important on a whim. But of course the entire story wouldn't have happened if they followed that.

---

1) This isn't reality, it's a tv series based on five epic fantasy novels
2) Joffrey had agreed with Cersei and his advisors to let Ned take the black. No one thought he was going to do that (maybe LF) and you can't overrule the king publicly. This is why Tywin sent Tyrion back to be hand to ensure the little a-hole didn't pull more stunts like that.
3) This isn't reality, it's a tv series based on five epic fantasy novels
4) If we want to compare to reality, there are numerous example of child/teen rulers, especially among the Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans.
5) This isn't reality, it's a tv series based on five epic fantasy novels

---

Yes.. but even in this non-reality it's stupid and laughable to have a 10 year old Momont chick running a city and leading veterans fighters into battle. That's the point. Her whole story line was ridiculous and is a knock against an otherwise great show.

---

She doesn't run a big city like Kings Landing, she runs a small island that only has like 60 fighters left in its army.

---

How big is your immediate family? Would you let a 10 year old lead that? No? Then why would you let her lead a 60 man army?

Social Media Influencer said:

---

All of your questions have been answered thoroughly.

Stop trying to NDA up this thread.

---

Perhaps you should tell others to stop goal tending for an obvious flaw in the show. Every show has flaws. This is one in GoT. It's no big deal. The show is still good.


Edit: and I find it funny that when I spend far more posts defending the show on having Arya killing the NK, I'm not accused of "NDAing" the thread. Admit it.... it's the fact that you don't like this particular opinion that you are accusing me of NDAing the thread. It's not me, it's you.

Quote:

---

The young rulers actually do call the shots, but they have adult advisers who provide guidance behind closed doors or by whispering in their ear to influence the direction of these shots and act as bumper guards to make sure the youngsters don't royally screw up.

Watch the season 6 episode when Jon, Sansa, and Ser Davos visit Lady Mormont to ask for troops. This photo of Lady Mormon silencing her advisor clearly indicates that she's in charge.

---

That's a good example of how the young ones have advisors. Also saw that with Maester Luwin (and a little too late Rodrik) supporting Bran at Winterfell.

But we've also seen a couple examples of adults only having authority as long the other "lower" lords supported them. The younger Starks couldn't keep the loyalty of all the lords Ned had under him. And Littlefinger obviously lost the support of the Knights of the Veil even after they had followed him to Winterfell.

gigemJTH12 said:

---

I've said this to swag multiple times but those of you who are upset with everything about last episode and are now writing off the chance that everything works out and finishes perfectly are giving yourselves wayyyy too much credit to think you've thought of every possible perfect ending for this show.

There are 3 left and a million ways it could go. Even some that, shocker I know, make the last episode's storyline seem flawless in hindsight.

Just let the Best show of all time finish out. yes the books are done but GRRM is still consulting the writing.

---

It's a good show. And I think the last episode was great (though not perfect.. yet I could not do better), but it's not the GOAT show.

Quote:

---

it's the fact that you don't like this particular opinion

---

Nope. Reading different opinions/insights is exactly why I come to these threads.

For the record I had many complaints with the last episode but my post isn't about details of that episode battle. It's for the people who think the storyline is all but ruined now.

Going back to the conversation on on negating the dragons so that its a more dramatic fight, wasn't King's Landing outfitted with all those spear launchers that would effectively deter their ability to bring the dragons close to the city and could potentially be deployed with any standing army?

To me that is how you limit the effectiveness of the dragons and require an alternative solution to defeat Cersei.

Questions after seeing something on the humor thread:

1. They had dragon glass on the high points of the top of the wall, but not in the gaps where the wights actually came through. Q: WTF?

2. This showed they suspected they would have to fight at the wall, against an undead force that can be killed by dragonglass (check) and fire. But unlike every other castle wall defense, they didn't have any oil at the top of the wall. Q: WTF?

bonfarr said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Urban Ag said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

smokeythebear said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

smokeythebear said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

smokeythebear said:

---

It doesn't matter what you would do, it only matters what precedence the show sets. When Joffrey takes over the throne for himself and Bran is shown making decisions in Winterfell (with the advice of Maester Lewin) then it absolutely makes sense that young kids would be the head of their household in other houses.

---

The fact that any of that happens is a flaw in the writing. I don't know who. Since Ned Stark was supposed to be Joffrey's regent (and Cersie stole that), I'm inclined too blame HBO.

---

Except that precedence was very clearly set by the books...

---

Which character(s)?

---

Joffrey, Tommen, and Bran.

---

Cersie was the regent for Joffrey and Tomnen. I forget on Bran.

One issue I have is that the regent seems to have no power in GoT. In reality, a young king wouldn't be able to defy the regent and start a war by executing somebody important on a whim. But of course the entire story wouldn't have happened if they followed that.

---

1) This isn't reality, it's a tv series based on five epic fantasy novels
2) Joffrey had agreed with Cersei and his advisors to let Ned take the black. No one thought he was going to do that (maybe LF) and you can't overrule the king publicly. This is why Tywin sent Tyrion back to be hand to ensure the little a-hole didn't pull more stunts like that.
3) This isn't reality, it's a tv series based on five epic fantasy novels
4) If we want to compare to reality, there are numerous example of child/teen rulers, especially among the Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans.
5) This isn't reality, it's a tv series based on five epic fantasy novels

---

Yes.. but even in this non-reality it's stupid and laughable to have a 10 year old Momont chick running a city and leading veterans fighters into battle. That's the point. Her whole story line was ridiculous and is a knock against an otherwise great show.

---

She doesn't run a big city like Kings Landing, she runs a small island that only has like 60 fighters left in its army.

---

How big is your immediate family? Would you let a 10 year old lead that? No? Then why would you let her lead a 60 man army?

---

If she was the rightful heir to a family that has ruled for centuries and she could have my head chopped off for saying otherwise I believe I would.

---

My point is that a family who has been successfully ruling for centuries wouldn't be stupid enough put a 10 year old in charge like that. They would do what King Robert tried to do and have a Regent (or "protector of the family") rule and teach the the rightful heir until he/she came of age. They wouldn't want things happening like a 10 year old stupidly chopping off somebody's head and starting a war unnecessarily.

Ironically, Joffery is good example of why you don't do that. His stupidity will likely end the family.

Social Media Influencer said:

---

Quote:

---

it's the fact that you don't like this particular opinion

---

Nope. Reading different opinions/insights is exactly why I come to these threads.

---

Apparently not.

gigemJTH12 said:

---

For the record I had many complaints with the last episode but my post isn't about details of that episode battle. It's for the people who think the storyline is all but ruined now.

---

Yeah, I don't think my complaints are small and don't ruin the story line at all. I fully expect to be surprised yet pleased with how things turn out.

Tywin and Tyrion actually tried to rein Joffrey in. Didn't work.

When Bran was in charge of Winterfell, did he have an advisor or did he make the decisions for his fiefdom?

So to move onto a different topic:


Who, along with me, thinks Cersei will attack now that the North and Dany are at their weakest and least prepared?

I think that Jamie will be torn until Bronn shows up and tells him that he's been sent by Cersei to kill him and Tyrion. Then he will side with Dany for good.

Quote:

---

But unlike every other castle wall defense, they didn't have any oil at the top of the wall. Q: WTF?

---

Wondered that too. I can't remember if they had anything like that when Stannis hit King's Landing?

Jon didn't do anything like that when the Wildlings attacked Castle Black, it was all regular combat.