HBO - Song of Ice&Fire Series -Varsity Thread - no TV only whiners (2 Viewers)

[Whomper]

FTR All targs burn. Dany got burnt by Drogon.

The fact she didn't burn in that ceremonial fire was a miracle and a one-time event.

Huh

Granny: Do Targaryens become immune to fire once they "bond" to their dragons?

George_RR_Martin: Granny, thanks for asking that. It gives me a chance to clear up a common misconception. TARGARYENS ARE NOT IMMUNE TO FIRE! The birth of Dany's dragons was unique, magical, wonderous, a miracle. She is called The Unburnt because she walked into the flames and lived. But her brother sure as hell wasn't immune to that molten gold.

Revanshe: So she won't be able to do it again?

George_RR_Martin: Probably not.

What about the boiling hot water in episode 1 season 1?

Also when the dragons burned the warlock,Dany was between the Dragons and the warlock. Looked like she was in the flames but maybe it was the angle of the shot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMvzfPDM3m0 starts at 1:40 mark

 

[Harry Manback]

FTR All targs burn. Dany got burnt by Drogon.

The fact she didn't burn in that ceremonial fire was a miracle and a one-time event.

Huh

Granny: Do Targaryens become immune to fire once they "bond" to their dragons?

George_RR_Martin: Granny, thanks for asking that. It gives me a chance to clear up a common misconception. TARGARYENS ARE NOT IMMUNE TO FIRE! The birth of Dany's dragons was unique, magical, wonderous, a miracle. She is called The Unburnt because she walked into the flames and lived. But her brother sure as hell wasn't immune to that molten gold.

Revanshe: So she won't be able to do it again?

George_RR_Martin: Probably not.

What about the boiling hot water in episode 1 season 1?

It wasn't boiling, just hotter than most would be comfortable.

I mean, if you aren't going to take the authors word on it, I'm certainly not going to convince you.

 

[Scoresman]

The only thing that makes me think he might really be dead is the interview he gave where he confirmed he wasnt coming back. They could always do some warg #### and he comes back as a talking wolf or something but that would be lame as ####.

The only thing that wouldnt be lame is if he warged into hodor and then hodor no longer only said hodor.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

The only thing that makes me think he might really be dead is the interview he gave where he confirmed he wasnt coming back. They could always do some warg #### and he comes back as a talking wolf or something but that would be lame as ####.

The only thing that wouldnt be lame is if he warged into hodor and then hodor no longer only said hodor.

Yeah. Cat stark gave the same interview. If he is truely dead what a collasal waste of time with all the speculation on parentage etc.I wouldnt put it past the showrunners to have a different actor play azzor azzhai reborn or whatever and it be jon snow. Im not sure the tv audience will like that one or not

 

[Whomper]

The only thing that makes me think he might really be dead is the interview he gave where he confirmed he wasnt coming back. They could always do some warg #### and he comes back as a talking wolf or something but that would be lame as ####.

The only thing that wouldnt be lame is if he warged into hodor and then hodor no longer only said hodor.

Yeah. Cat stark gave the same interview. If he is truely dead what a collasal waste of time with all the speculation on parentage etc.I wouldnt put it past the showrunners to have a different actor play azzor azzhai reborn or whatever and it be jon snow. Im not sure the tv audience will like that one or not

It would be a head scratcher if Snow is coming back and they dont use Harrington on the show. Women fans of GOT certainly love the guy. I guess, if Snow is AA, if he doesnt come back in the books looking the same they will follow that in the show.

 

[Gr00vus]

I think if Jon is alive or not or in what capacity will be resolved early on in the TV show next year because the Wall burn their dead. This could also give possible insight to the theory R+L=J. Imagine they go to burn Jon early next season and he doesnt burn ? Some targareans do (Viserys and Maester Aemon) and some dont (dany) That would be pretty frigging awesome if it went down that way

Way back in book/season 1, Jon got pretty severely burned while saving Mormont from the zombies by lighting them on fire. I don't think anything's happened between then and where they are now to think he wouldn't burn if they light him on fire.

Maybe Stannis isn't totally dead and Jon wargs into Stannis. Hopefully not, but it would reopen the possibility of some of Mellisandre's visions coming true.

 

[Mile High]

The TV only thread shows how much the show ####ed Stannis.

 

[Gr00vus]

The TV only thread shows how much the show ####ed Stannis.

He was never a very likable character. He also wasn't a very compelling character. I've been baffled all along at the amount of time and attention Stannis got in this story. If the end result is he's just dead on the outskirts of Winterfell, the end, it was a real waste of pages/screen time. I have to believe that's not the end game for Stannis in this story.

 

[Thunderlips]

The TV only thread shows how much the show ####ed Stannis.

He was never a very likable character. He also wasn't a very compelling character. I've been baffled all along at the amount of time and attention Stannis got in this story. If the end result is he's just dead on the outskirts of Winterfell, the end, it was a real waste of pages/screen time. I have to believe that's not the end game for Stannis in this story.

He morphs into the zealot (and the show makes him worse with the sacrificing of his daughter)........but I don't see much of a difference between him and Ned. Both are honor driven, have an emphasis on duty and what is right and to a fault have an inability to play those types of showmanship games that are neccessary at the top of the Westeros ruling class.

Plus, is the time and energy devoted to him much different than to that of Robb?

 

[Gr00vus]

The TV only thread shows how much the show ####ed Stannis.

He was never a very likable character. He also wasn't a very compelling character. I've been baffled all along at the amount of time and attention Stannis got in this story. If the end result is he's just dead on the outskirts of Winterfell, the end, it was a real waste of pages/screen time. I have to believe that's not the end game for Stannis in this story.

He morphs into the zealot (and the show makes him worse with the sacrificing of his daughter)........but I don't see much of a difference between him and Ned. Both are honor driven, have an emphasis on duty and what is right and to a fault have an inability to play those types of showmanship games that are neccessary at the top of the Westeros ruling class.

Plus, is the time and energy devoted to him much different than to that of Robb?

Ned and Robb were both likable, compelling characters. There was more to Ned than just duty, they showed him struggling with the decisions he made. Stannis was just a dry toast robot with an urge to rule. We felt bad when Robb and Ned were killed, with Stannis it was more like hooray I don't have to see/read anymore about him.

 

[Scoresman]

mycella obviously had the hots for her dad cause it was triggered last time when that snake pixie showed her ####### and blood started flowing to bronns sex parts

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

mycella obviously had the hots for her dad cause it was triggered last time when that snake pixie showed her ####### and blood started flowing to bronns sex parts

there was a little creepy vibe in that scene imo.

I might be projecting some creepiness, however.

 

[Thunderlips]

The TV only thread shows how much the show ####ed Stannis.

He was never a very likable character. He also wasn't a very compelling character. I've been baffled all along at the amount of time and attention Stannis got in this story. If the end result is he's just dead on the outskirts of Winterfell, the end, it was a real waste of pages/screen time. I have to believe that's not the end game for Stannis in this story.

He morphs into the zealot (and the show makes him worse with the sacrificing of his daughter)........but I don't see much of a difference between him and Ned. Both are honor driven, have an emphasis on duty and what is right and to a fault have an inability to play those types of showmanship games that are neccessary at the top of the Westeros ruling class.

Plus, is the time and energy devoted to him much different than to that of Robb?

Ned and Robb were both likable, compelling characters. There was more to Ned than just duty, they showed him struggling with the decisions he made. Stannis was just a dry toast robot with an urge to rule. We felt bad when Robb and Ned were killed, with Stannis it was more like hooray I don't have to see/read anymore about him.

Stannis was wanting his rightful claim. There's nothing wrong with that. I don't see that as an urge to rule. I think Renly had the urge to rule since he attempted to upjump his brother. Go back to the War of the Five Kings....out of them all, Stannis had the most legit claim.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

The TV only thread shows how much the show ####ed Stannis.

He was never a very likable character. He also wasn't a very compelling character. I've been baffled all along at the amount of time and attention Stannis got in this story. If the end result is he's just dead on the outskirts of Winterfell, the end, it was a real waste of pages/screen time. I have to believe that's not the end game for Stannis in this story.

He morphs into the zealot (and the show makes him worse with the sacrificing of his daughter)........but I don't see much of a difference between him and Ned. Both are honor driven, have an emphasis on duty and what is right and to a fault have an inability to play those types of showmanship games that are neccessary at the top of the Westeros ruling class.

Plus, is the time and energy devoted to him much different than to that of Robb?

Ned and Robb were both likable, compelling characters. There was more to Ned than just duty, they showed him struggling with the decisions he made. Stannis was just a dry toast robot with an urge to rule. We felt bad when Robb and Ned were killed, with Stannis it was more like hooray I don't have to see/read anymore about him.

Stannis was wanting his rightful claim. There's nothing wrong with that. I don't see that as an urge to rule. I think Renly had the urge to rule since he attempted to upjump his brother. Go back to the War of the Five Kings....out of them all, Stannis had the most legit claim.

and now all 5 kings are dead

 

[parrot]

The TV only thread shows how much the show ####ed Stannis.

He was never a very likable character. He also wasn't a very compelling character. I've been baffled all along at the amount of time and attention Stannis got in this story. If the end result is he's just dead on the outskirts of Winterfell, the end, it was a real waste of pages/screen time. I have to believe that's not the end game for Stannis in this story.

He morphs into the zealot (and the show makes him worse with the sacrificing of his daughter)........but I don't see much of a difference between him and Ned. Both are honor driven, have an emphasis on duty and what is right and to a fault have an inability to play those types of showmanship games that are neccessary at the top of the Westeros ruling class.

Plus, is the time and energy devoted to him much different than to that of Robb?

Ned and Robb were both likable, compelling characters. There was more to Ned than just duty, they showed him struggling with the decisions he made. Stannis was just a dry toast robot with an urge to rule. We felt bad when Robb and Ned were killed, with Stannis it was more like hooray I don't have to see/read anymore about him.

Stannis was wanting his rightful claim. There's nothing wrong with that. I don't see that as an urge to rule. I think Renly had the urge to rule since he attempted to upjump his brother. Go back to the War of the Five Kings....out of them all, Stannis had the most legit claim.

and now all 5 kings are dead

Stannis isn't dead in the book, Balon Greyjoy isn't dead on the show.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

The TV only thread shows how much the show ####ed Stannis.

He was never a very likable character. He also wasn't a very compelling character. I've been baffled all along at the amount of time and attention Stannis got in this story. If the end result is he's just dead on the outskirts of Winterfell, the end, it was a real waste of pages/screen time. I have to believe that's not the end game for Stannis in this story.

He morphs into the zealot (and the show makes him worse with the sacrificing of his daughter)........but I don't see much of a difference between him and Ned. Both are honor driven, have an emphasis on duty and what is right and to a fault have an inability to play those types of showmanship games that are neccessary at the top of the Westeros ruling class.

Plus, is the time and energy devoted to him much different than to that of Robb?

Ned and Robb were both likable, compelling characters. There was more to Ned than just duty, they showed him struggling with the decisions he made. Stannis was just a dry toast robot with an urge to rule. We felt bad when Robb and Ned were killed, with Stannis it was more like hooray I don't have to see/read anymore about him.

Stannis was wanting his rightful claim. There's nothing wrong with that. I don't see that as an urge to rule. I think Renly had the urge to rule since he attempted to upjump his brother. Go back to the War of the Five Kings....out of them all, Stannis had the most legit claim.

and now all 5 kings are dead

Stannis isn't dead in the book, Balon Greyjoy isn't dead on the show.

they will be................they will be

 

[Gr00vus]

Stannis was wanting his rightful claim. There's nothing wrong with that. I don't see that as an urge to rule. I think Renly had the urge to rule since he attempted to upjump his brother. Go back to the War of the Five Kings....out of them all, Stannis had the most legit claim.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that (well actually there was plenty wrong with how he went about realizing his claim). I'm saying he was a boringly written character that they spent a ton of time on, and if he's just plain dead there was zero payoff for dragging us through 5 books/seasons worth of his dull grey life of duty and failure. I didn't really care if he failed or succeeded - I just wanted chapters/scenes with him in them to end as quickly as possible.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Stannis was wanting his rightful claim. There's nothing wrong with that. I don't see that as an urge to rule. I think Renly had the urge to rule since he attempted to upjump his brother. Go back to the War of the Five Kings....out of them all, Stannis had the most legit claim.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that (well actually there was plenty wrong with how he went about realizing his claim). I'm saying he was a boringly written character that they spent a ton of time on, and if he's just plain dead there was zero payoff for dragging us through 5 books/seasons worth of his dull grey life of duty and failure. I didn't really care if he failed or succeeded - I just wanted chapters/scenes with him in them to end as quickly as possible.

But you learned more about the people around him, and they are still alive.

 

[Gr00vus]

Stannis was wanting his rightful claim. There's nothing wrong with that. I don't see that as an urge to rule. I think Renly had the urge to rule since he attempted to upjump his brother. Go back to the War of the Five Kings....out of them all, Stannis had the most legit claim.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that (well actually there was plenty wrong with how he went about realizing his claim). I'm saying he was a boringly written character that they spent a ton of time on, and if he's just plain dead there was zero payoff for dragging us through 5 books/seasons worth of his dull grey life of duty and failure. I didn't really care if he failed or succeeded - I just wanted chapters/scenes with him in them to end as quickly as possible.

But you learned more about the people around him, and they are still alive.

Well, actually, most of them aren't. The only 2 that made it out alive are Davos and Mellisandre. I like Davos o.k. as a character, Mellisandre has been pretty cartoony. The whole Stannis plot has kinda sucked throughout - and if this is the entirety of the payoff it really wasn't worth it. They may as well have had chapters full of descriptions of meals Sam ate with a trencher instead.

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

Well, Westeros needs ditch diggers, too.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Stannis was wanting his rightful claim. There's nothing wrong with that. I don't see that as an urge to rule. I think Renly had the urge to rule since he attempted to upjump his brother. Go back to the War of the Five Kings....out of them all, Stannis had the most legit claim.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that (well actually there was plenty wrong with how he went about realizing his claim). I'm saying he was a boringly written character that they spent a ton of time on, and if he's just plain dead there was zero payoff for dragging us through 5 books/seasons worth of his dull grey life of duty and failure. I didn't really care if he failed or succeeded - I just wanted chapters/scenes with him in them to end as quickly as possible.

But you learned more about the people around him, and they are still alive.

Well, actually, most of them aren't. The only 2 that made it out alive are Davos and Mellisandre. I like Davos o.k. as a character, Mellisandre has been pretty cartoony. The whole Stannis plot has kinda sucked throughout - and if this is the entirety of the payoff it really wasn't worth it. They may as well have had chapters full of descriptions of meals Sam ate with a trencher instead.

Would he be in his cups?

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

I really don't think you can compare and contrast the "payoffs" of the various storylines when a story is told from many different POVs and involves stories about MANY MANY characters.

Also, Stannis was never a POV character. Davos was. Red Lady was too (IIRC). Those checks have not been cashed yet.



(I can see the gripe with Briene but I thought that "payoff" was pretty cool in the end and also served to paint a bleak picture of the Riverlands, etc.)

 

[thecatch]

Stannis was wanting his rightful claim. There's nothing wrong with that. I don't see that as an urge to rule. I think Renly had the urge to rule since he attempted to upjump his brother. Go back to the War of the Five Kings....out of them all, Stannis had the most legit claim.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that (well actually there was plenty wrong with how he went about realizing his claim). I'm saying he was a boringly written character that they spent a ton of time on, and if he's just plain dead there was zero payoff for dragging us through 5 books/seasons worth of his dull grey life of duty and failure. I didn't really care if he failed or succeeded - I just wanted chapters/scenes with him in them to end as quickly as possible.

But you learned more about the people around him, and they are still alive.

Yup. He moved the plot even if you didn't find him to be interesting. All the ripple effects of his actions are vital to the story - eg, the whole Tyrell/Lannister relationship is greatly impacted by Stannis's actions.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Also, Stannis was never a POV character. Davos was. Red Lady was too (IIRC). Those checks have not been cashed yet.

Exactly. Stannis was only important from the perspective of how he related to the people surrounding him. As opposed to Varys or Littlefinger, where you don't get POV because you'd learn too much about the things you're not supposed to know.

 

[Sabertooth]

The TV only thread shows how much the show ####ed Stannis.

He was never a very likable character. He also wasn't a very compelling character. I've been baffled all along at the amount of time and attention Stannis got in this story. If the end result is he's just dead on the outskirts of Winterfell, the end, it was a real waste of pages/screen time. I have to believe that's not the end game for Stannis in this story.

He morphs into the zealot (and the show makes him worse with the sacrificing of his daughter)........but I don't see much of a difference between him and Ned. Both are honor driven, have an emphasis on duty and what is right and to a fault have an inability to play those types of showmanship games that are neccessary at the top of the Westeros ruling class.

Plus, is the time and energy devoted to him much different than to that of Robb?

Ned and Robb were both likable, compelling characters. There was more to Ned than just duty, they showed him struggling with the decisions he made. Stannis was just a dry toast robot with an urge to rule. We felt bad when Robb and Ned were killed, with Stannis it was more like hooray I don't have to see/read anymore about him.

Stannis was wanting his rightful claim. There's nothing wrong with that. I don't see that as an urge to rule. I think Renly had the urge to rule since he attempted to upjump his brother. Go back to the War of the Five Kings....out of them all, Stannis had the most legit claim.

and now all 5 kings are dead

Stannis isn't dead in the book, Balon Greyjoy isn't dead on the show.

 

[Gr00vus]

Stannis was wanting his rightful claim. There's nothing wrong with that. I don't see that as an urge to rule. I think Renly had the urge to rule since he attempted to upjump his brother. Go back to the War of the Five Kings....out of them all, Stannis had the most legit claim.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that (well actually there was plenty wrong with how he went about realizing his claim). I'm saying he was a boringly written character that they spent a ton of time on, and if he's just plain dead there was zero payoff for dragging us through 5 books/seasons worth of his dull grey life of duty and failure. I didn't really care if he failed or succeeded - I just wanted chapters/scenes with him in them to end as quickly as possible.

But you learned more about the people around him, and they are still alive.

Well, actually, most of them aren't. The only 2 that made it out alive are Davos and Mellisandre. I like Davos o.k. as a character, Mellisandre has been pretty cartoony. The whole Stannis plot has kinda sucked throughout - and if this is the entirety of the payoff it really wasn't worth it. They may as well have had chapters full of descriptions of meals Sam ate with a trencher instead.

Would he be in his cups?

Initially, then he transitions into being in Gilly's cups.

 

[psychobillies]

Stannis was wanting his rightful claim. There's nothing wrong with that. I don't see that as an urge to rule. I think Renly had the urge to rule since he attempted to upjump his brother. Go back to the War of the Five Kings....out of them all, Stannis had the most legit claim.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that (well actually there was plenty wrong with how he went about realizing his claim). I'm saying he was a boringly written character that they spent a ton of time on, and if he's just plain dead there was zero payoff for dragging us through 5 books/seasons worth of his dull grey life of duty and failure. I didn't really care if he failed or succeeded - I just wanted chapters/scenes with him in them to end as quickly as possible.

But you learned more about the people around him, and they are still alive.

Well, actually, most of them aren't. The only 2 that made it out alive are Davos and Mellisandre. I like Davos o.k. as a character, Mellisandre has been pretty cartoony. The whole Stannis plot has kinda sucked throughout - and if this is the entirety of the payoff it really wasn't worth it. They may as well have had chapters full of descriptions of meals Sam ate with a trencher instead.

Patchface? I could see him making a run at the White Walkers.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Stannis was wanting his rightful claim. There's nothing wrong with that. I don't see that as an urge to rule. I think Renly had the urge to rule since he attempted to upjump his brother. Go back to the War of the Five Kings....out of them all, Stannis had the most legit claim.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that (well actually there was plenty wrong with how he went about realizing his claim). I'm saying he was a boringly written character that they spent a ton of time on, and if he's just plain dead there was zero payoff for dragging us through 5 books/seasons worth of his dull grey life of duty and failure. I didn't really care if he failed or succeeded - I just wanted chapters/scenes with him in them to end as quickly as possible.

But you learned more about the people around him, and they are still alive.

Well, actually, most of them aren't. The only 2 that made it out alive are Davos and Mellisandre. I like Davos o.k. as a character, Mellisandre has been pretty cartoony. The whole Stannis plot has kinda sucked throughout - and if this is the entirety of the payoff it really wasn't worth it. They may as well have had chapters full of descriptions of meals Sam ate with a trencher instead.

Would he be in his cups?

Initially, then he transitions into being in Gilly's cups.

As long as somebody's in their cups, we're good. I'll be in mine.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Im only 69 pages into my reread of GOT. I forgot all this detail that there was written. Also, reading with the idea of r + l = j in mind, you see lots of clues, even this early on. Also clues of Tyrion being a targ as well (white hair).

 

[PatsWillWin]

At this point, I'm concerned about the whole thing. Book, TV, everything.

 

[Tusken Raider]

Third and fourth are Willas and Garlan Tyrell, the older brothers to Loras and Margery Tyrell. "I didn’t just put them in for hoots and giggles, they have roles to play in the last two books, and they don’t exist in the show," Martin said

Maybe we could get Tyrion involved with them somehow and he could ask them to clarify a position on something, and Tyrion could ask, "What you talking 'bout Willas?"

Yep, right after Willas mispronounces his name as "Tyrone."

As for next season's GoT, there are plenty of storylines that have been left out that can still be visited. The show could be taking a cue from AFFC and ADWD, focusing on some of the plotlines that have been left out:

Riverlands/Freys, and something for Jamie to do now that Dorne has been visited. Stoneheart, and Brienne's fate now that she's confronted Stannis.

Iron Islands/Victarion haven't even been touched. Asha(Yara) hasn't been seen in a while.

Maybe Aegon is introduced and takes his case to Dorne, rather than to Dany. The Dorne/Aegon storyline could set up Dany's return to Westeros.

Take those, sprinkle in Cersei, Arya, Sansa, Bran, Jon, Dany, Tyrion, and some walker stuff, and you have plenty to go on for Season 6.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

So much stuff to find.

Alleras = Sarella, the Sand Snake, pretending to be a boy in Oldtown. Hanging out with Marwyn, Samwell and Jaqen H'gar (in the guise of poor dead Pate).

Favorite wild-eyed theory for the grouping? They're a future dragon kill squad.

 

[Swing 51]

^^Interesting, I hadn't read about the theory wdcrob posted above on Alleras.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Third and fourth are Willas and Garlan Tyrell, the older brothers to Loras and Margery Tyrell. "I didn’t just put them in for hoots and giggles, they have roles to play in the last two books, and they don’t exist in the show," Martin said

Maybe we could get Tyrion involved with them somehow and he could ask them to clarify a position on something, and Tyrion could ask, "What you talking 'bout Willas?"

Yep, right after Willas mispronounces his name as "Tyrone."

As for next season's GoT, there are plenty of storylines that have been left out that can still be visited. The show could be taking a cue from AFFC and ADWD, focusing on some of the plotlines that have been left out:

Riverlands/Freys, and something for Jamie to do now that Dorne has been visited. Stoneheart, and Brienne's fate now that she's confronted Stannis.

Iron Islands/Victarion haven't even been touched. Asha(Yara) hasn't been seen in a while.

Maybe Aegon is introduced and takes his case to Dorne, rather than to Dany. The Dorne/Aegon storyline could set up Dany's return to Westeros.

Take those, sprinkle in Cersei, Arya, Sansa, Bran, Jon, Dany, Tyrion, and some walker stuff, and you have plenty to go on for Season 6.

Just a guess, but Season 6 will be based on The Winds of Winter....

 

[KarmaPolice]

Im only 69 pages into my reread of GOT. I forgot all this detail that there was written. Also, reading with the idea of r + l = j in mind, you see lots of clues, even this early on. Also clues of Tyrion being a targ as well (white hair).

If I remember there were a few things about Tyrion being obsessed with fire too.

 

[Gr00vus]

Since we've got some time, care to speculate on the twist Martin was talking about being impossible in the show?

I assume that means the twist involves someone who's dead (not cliffhanger dead, and not likely resurrection candidate dead), though it could also include characters who just haven't been included in the show (yet) like Arianne Martell and her crew, Connington/Young Griff, etc. Since in the latter case it's hard to predict who might still appear in the show, I'm wondering who's been proper killed in the show that hasn't been in the books. There's probably a list like that out there somewhere, but it's more entertaining to see who people here remember.

Off the top of my head (and it's been a couple of years since reading so I may have some of these wrong):

Meryn Trant

Selmy

Grenn

Mance Rayder

Shireen

Selyse

Rakharo....

 

[Gr00vus]

Jeyne Westerling

 

[Nick Vermeil]

Myrcella Lannister Baratheon? (jury out)

 

[Gr00vus]

Myrcella Lannister Baratheon? (jury out)

I've still got her in the cliffhanger dead category, but it doesn't look good.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

My first thought was Stannis or Myrcella.

 

[Gator Shawn]

I just enjoy this every week:
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/b56c8d2006/gay-of-thrones-s5-ep-10-recap-with-d-arcy-carden

"They make her walk through a live version of Youtube Comments irl."

 

[Mile High]

No getting where they are going with the Myrcella story line. First the guy in the wheelchair tells the sand snake "you don't do what I say you're dead. Then she poisons Myrcella after giving the prince to Jamie. Then I watched the scene again where she kisses Myrcella and it looked liked the guy in the wheelchair was in on it, he gave the sand snake a little nod like you know what to do.

 

[Tusken Raider]

Third and fourth are Willas and Garlan Tyrell, the older brothers to Loras and Margery Tyrell. "I didn’t just put them in for hoots and giggles, they have roles to play in the last two books, and they don’t exist in the show," Martin said

Maybe we could get Tyrion involved with them somehow and he could ask them to clarify a position on something, and Tyrion could ask, "What you talking 'bout Willas?"

Yep, right after Willas mispronounces his name as "Tyrone."

As for next season's GoT, there are plenty of storylines that have been left out that can still be visited. The show could be taking a cue from AFFC and ADWD, focusing on some of the plotlines that have been left out:

Riverlands/Freys, and something for Jamie to do now that Dorne has been visited. Stoneheart, and Brienne's fate now that she's confronted Stannis.

Iron Islands/Victarion haven't even been touched. Asha(Yara) hasn't been seen in a while.

Maybe Aegon is introduced and takes his case to Dorne, rather than to Dany. The Dorne/Aegon storyline could set up Dany's return to Westeros.

Take those, sprinkle in Cersei, Arya, Sansa, Bran, Jon, Dany, Tyrion, and some walker stuff, and you have plenty to go on for Season 6.

Just a guess, but Season 6 will be based on The Winds of Winter....

I agree. Just speculating that there's plenty of material already out there that they can focus on, instead of just dropping and going with TWOW material.

 

[KarmaPolice]

No getting where they are going with the Myrcella story line. First the guy in the wheelchair tells the sand snake "you don't do what I say you're dead. Then she poisons Myrcella after giving the prince to Jamie. Then I watched the scene again where she kisses Myrcella and it looked liked the guy in the wheelchair was in on it, he gave the sand snake a little nod like you know what to do.

I can't remember- was that line delivered in front of Jamie? If so, was it just a show so he trusts him?

 

[Gr00vus]

No getting where they are going with the Myrcella story line. First the guy in the wheelchair tells the sand snake "you don't do what I say you're dead. Then she poisons Myrcella after giving the prince to Jamie. Then I watched the scene again where she kisses Myrcella and it looked liked the guy in the wheelchair was in on it, he gave the sand snake a little nod like you know what to do.

At first I thought Doran was in on it.

But now I don't see what poisoning Myrcella (at this point) gains him. I could see it after she marries Trystane, then they kill Tommen, Myrcella inherits, then maybe they kill her and Trystane is king, or kill her after she bears him a son. But poisoning her now doesn't make any obvious sense long term from Doran's perspective. I don't see how they could reasonably frame Jamie for it, I suppose they could frame Bronn but I don't know what the point of that would be. Maybe Trystane's in on it, has some antidote and blackmails Jamie into more concessions in exchange for saving her - but that doesn't seem plausible. If they were going to do that, why wait until they're on the ship?

Seems more like Ellaria did this on her own and now Doran is going to have to deal with the consequences - kinda like how Arianne messed things up in the books. I just hope it doesn't mean they turn the ship around and Jamie gets to play hostage again for another season.

 

[PIK95]

No getting where they are going with the Myrcella story line. First the guy in the wheelchair tells the sand snake "you don't do what I say you're dead. Then she poisons Myrcella after giving the prince to Jamie. Then I watched the scene again where she kisses Myrcella and it looked liked the guy in the wheelchair was in on it, he gave the sand snake a little nod like you know what to do.

At first I thought Doran was in on it.But now I don't see what poisoning Myrcella (at this point) gains him. I could see it after she marries Trystane, then they kill Tommen, Myrcella inherits, then maybe they kill her and Trystane is king, or kill her after she bears him a son. But poisoning her now doesn't make any obvious sense long term from Doran's perspective. I don't see how they could reasonably frame Jamie for it, I suppose they could frame Bronn but I don't know what the point of that would be. Maybe Trystane's in on it, has some antidote and blackmails Jamie into more concessions in exchange for saving her - but that doesn't seem plausible. If they were going to do that, why wait until they're on the ship?

Seems more like Ellaria did this on her own and now Doran is going to have to deal with the consequences - kinda like how Arianne messed things up in the books. I just hope it doesn't mean they turn the ship around and Jamie gets to play hostage again for another season.

The prince probably has the antidote and will save her

 

[Mile High]

No getting where they are going with the Myrcella story line. First the guy in the wheelchair tells the sand snake "you don't do what I say you're dead. Then she poisons Myrcella after giving the prince to Jamie. Then I watched the scene again where she kisses Myrcella and it looked liked the guy in the wheelchair was in on it, he gave the sand snake a little nod like you know what to do.

At first I thought Doran was in on it.But now I don't see what poisoning Myrcella (at this point) gains him. I could see it after she marries Trystane, then they kill Tommen, Myrcella inherits, then maybe they kill her and Trystane is king, or kill her after she bears him a son. But poisoning her now doesn't make any obvious sense long term from Doran's perspective. I don't see how they could reasonably frame Jamie for it, I suppose they could frame Bronn but I don't know what the point of that would be. Maybe Trystane's in on it, has some antidote and blackmails Jamie into more concessions in exchange for saving her - but that doesn't seem plausible. If they were going to do that, why wait until they're on the ship?

Seems more like Ellaria did this on her own and now Doran is going to have to deal with the consequences - kinda like how Arianne messed things up in the books. I just hope it doesn't mean they turn the ship around and Jamie gets to play hostage again for another season.

The prince probably has the antidote and will save her

It's a Dorne ship with a Dorne crew? If so I guess Trystane will be the one who calls the shots.

 

[packersfan]

Seems like a pretty unfillable void (storytelling wise) in the North if both Jon and Stannis are dead and not coming back. Pretty much leaves only the Boltons and Bran as anyone who can do much up there. Neither have been very compelling throughout the story so far, so it'll be tough keeping interest in that area if that's the case.

From a simple storytelling perspective this may be the strongest form of evidence that Jon is still alive. If he's truly dead a gigantic section of the storyline becomes irrelevant for many viewers. Who cares what happens at the wall and with the white walkers if there isn't a primary character there to confront them? With Jon dead (and even Sam gone) there isn't a character in the watch that people are invested in and I don't see any of the Wildlings emerging as a central character on the show at this point. So you have this enormous part of the story (the series itself began with it) and no one there for the viewers to care about in terms of what it's conclusion might be.

That alone seems to me to be a pretty good reason to resurrect Snow.

On top of that you have the battle with the walkers where the Night King takes a clear interest in Jon. That clearly seemed to be setting the stage for something to occur down the road. Why do all that if you're just going to kill Jon off for good two episodes later? Doesn't make a lot of sense. In addition there was so much done with showing Melisandre's interest in Jon and her witch skills that may involve bringing the dead back to life. I realize that seems pretty obvious that she's back at the wall when Jon is attacked but again why go to the trouble of setting all that up if the plan is to just kill him off for good?

Just seems that a lot of care was done this season in particular to set Jon up for something down the road on top of everything that was done for four seasons. I'm not sure any of the other major characters who died and haven't returned had so much done to establish possible long-term importance to the story. Jon seems to be the one who does. So it would strike me as really odd to do all that and just kill him off for good. From a simple pragmatic storytelling point of view that just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Or GRRM is a grim guy showing that the westerosi as a whole have become too selfish and bigoted. The divide is too great between the rich and poor. There's a real threat out there. There are leaders who see it. There are dragons to fight it. But not enough people can see the big picture and everybody is going to die.

 

[Kraft...]

I think the Watch is up #### creek without Snow. Why let all those Wildlings through then kill him? Snow was their ally isn't there now a chance they will wipe out The Watch for killing him? They are still hopelessly out numbered. All those Wildlings are not helpless woman and children after all.