OILERMAN

The Game of Thrones

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, reo said:

Yes. He was the heir to Winterfell and it probably wouldn't have stopped them from naming him King since it also would've United the realms. Why would he turn down Winterfell? He'd then name Sansa as the Lady of Winterfell. And he did know they were going to name him King. He said as much.

As he said, he’s not really Brandon Stark anymore. Based on that, perhaps he does not fit into the Stark line of succession anymore.

 

Certainly he said he can’t be lord of Winterfell, so if that’s not why then he had some other reason. Possibly because he would have been the end of the Stark lineage. Sansa could carry on the bloodline and there is precedent for a Stark woman marrying and the husband taking the name when there is no male heir. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Starkiller said:

As he said, he’s not really Brandon Stark anymore. Based on that, perhaps he does not fit into the Stark line of succession anymore.

 

That doesn't even make sense. By blood he's still a Stark.

 

24 minutes ago, Starkiller said:

 

Certainly he said he can’t be lord of Winterfell, so if that’s not why then he had some other reason. Possibly because he would have been the end of the Stark lineage. Sansa could carry on the bloodline and there is precedent for a Stark woman marrying and the husband taking the name when there is no male heir. 

Once he was King of the North and then King of the Realm, he could name Sansa Lady of Winterfell to continue to line. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, reo said:

Seems weird he'd turn down King of the North then take the Iron Throne. Wouldn't be surprised if he took both to unite the realm in the books. 

I've seen this so many times mentioned as bad writing. Bran never says "I can never be king". He says "I can never be a lord'. King and Lord are two different titles.

 

In the books or show, is there ever anyone who is both protector of the realm and a lord at the same time? Robert Baratheon gave lordship of Storm's End to Renly. Why didn't he just keep it himself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, NashvilleNinja said:

I've seen this so many times mentioned as bad writing. Bran never says "I can never be king". He says "I can never be a lord'. King and Lord are two different titles.

 

In the books or show, is there ever anyone who is both protector of the realm and a lord at the same time? Robert Baratheon gave lordship of Storm's End to Renly. Why didn't he just keep it himself?

He wouldn't be. He'd have been Lord of Winterfell but then they'd have named him King in the North. Then he'd become King of the Realm then he'd name Sansa Lady of Winterfell. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, reo said:

That doesn't even make sense. By blood he's still a Stark.

That doesn’t necessarily matter. Certainly not if he refuses the title. 

 

 

7 hours ago, reo said:

Once he was King of the North and then King of the Realm, he could name Sansa Lady of Winterfell to continue to line. 

Or they could just let Sansa rule on her own as the “rightful” heir...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, reo said:

He wouldn't be. He'd have been Lord of Winterfell but then they'd have named him King in the North. Then he'd become King of the Realm then he'd name Sansa Lady of Winterfell. 

That may be needed detail/change for the books, but would it be necessary for the show? The end result would be the same, the north naming her queen in the north.

 

I'm just wondering why people think it's such a contradiction for him to accept their choosing him to be king but not accept lordship. If he knew he would be choosen to be king anyway what would be the point of accepting lordship?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Starkiller said:

That doesn’t necessarily matter. Certainly not if he refuses the title. 

 

 

Point being, him refusing the title didn't make sense bc he could've used it to unite the realms in the end.

 

37 minutes ago, Starkiller said:

Or they could just let Sansa rule on her own as the “rightful” heir...

 

See above. That ended up with her becoming Queen. That didn't have to happen.

 

30 minutes ago, NashvilleNinja said:

That may be needed detail/change for the books, but would it be necessary for the show? The end result would be the same, the north naming her queen in the north.

 

No, it wouldn't. They'd have named him King in the North. The North wouldn't follow a southern King. Bran isn't a southern King. He's the rightful heir to Winterfell and would be King in the North. Sansa would then be Lady of Winterfell, not Queen.

 

30 minutes ago, NashvilleNinja said:

I'm just wondering why people think it's such a contradiction for him to accept their choosing him to be king but not accept lordship. If he knew he would be choosen to be king anyway what would be the point of accepting lordship?

Bc he would know it wasn't just accepting a lordship. It would he becoming King of the North and then King of all the realms thus uniting the kingdoms. 

 

 

The only real reasoning for him not doing this would be if he wanted the North to be separate from the other Kingdoms for some reason.

 

Sidenote in the end I assume Jon, Sansa and Bran all ended up ruling bc I assume Jon would would probably become the King Beyond the Wall. Starks rule them all! Lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, reo said:

 

Point being, him refusing the title didn't make sense bc he could've used it to unite the realms in the end.

 

 

See above. That ended up with her becoming Queen. That didn't have to happen.

 

 

No, it wouldn't. They'd have named him King in the North. The North wouldn't follow a southern King. Bran isn't a southern King. He's the rightful heir to Winterfell and would be King in the North. Sansa would then be Lady of Winterfell, not Queen.

 

Bc he would know it wasn't just accepting a lordship. It would he becoming King of the North and then King of all the realms thus uniting the kingdoms. 

 

 

The only real reasoning for him not doing this would be if he wanted the North to be separate from the other Kingdoms for some reason.

 

Sidenote in the end I assume Jon, Sansa and Bran all ended up ruling bc I assume Jon would would probably become the King Beyond the Wall. Starks rule them all! Lol

I don't see the value in analyzing the show based solely on plot any further.  If someone has cool shit to tell us about how they set up scenes and other visual storytelling, I'm interested.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Jamalisms said:

Nah.

But at the same time, yah!

 

Also, the Velveeta is strong with this one:

 

 

"If Game of Thones was made in the 90's."

 

 

Edited by NashvilleNinja

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, abenjami said:

So did this thread turn out to be the longest one in the history of the board?

Yep.... just checked. The most replies in the Titans forum wound up being around 3k. The next closest overall with 6k replies is some Trump thread. But this thread has taken the TR throne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.