Board 8 > Game of Thrones Season 7 - Says here 'Ragger' had 'Anal'... (SPOILERS)

(+) Yeah! (+)

In Iceland?
---

So it's pretty much confirmed that Dany is Jon's aunt right?

So if and when they bang, are people going to be as ew as they have been with Cersei and Jamie, or because it is a ship they approve of it's all a-okay?
---

FFDragon posted...

So it's pretty much confirmed that Dany is Jon's aunt right?

So if and when they bang, are people going to be as ew as they have been with Cersei and Jamie, or because it is a ship they approve of it's all a-okay?

They'll be fine with it. I'm not even 100% sure that everyone even realizes it, I've spoken to some people who didn't understand the obvious implication from last season because they didn't remember the backstory to Lyanna.
---

Anagram posted...

I'm not even 100% sure that everyone even realizes it

they will when bran walks in on them to inform them of the situation
---

"you looked so beautiful inside your aunt"
---

xp1337 posted...

Anagram posted...

I'm not even 100% sure that everyone even realizes it

they will when bran walks in on them to inform them of the situation

Man, we now have Bran, Sam, and Howland Reed who could all tell them. The writers wouldn't have included that manuscript saying Rhaegar remarried without planning to use it.

God, it would be hilarious if Dany conquers Westeros and then realizes she's not the rightful heir to House Targaryen.
---

Oh man I didn't even consider that implication. Dany is older right? But if Jon is a trueborn son, that takes precedent yeah?
---

FFDragon posted...

Oh man I didn't even consider that implication. Dany is older right? But if Jon is a trueborn son, that takes precedent yeah?

Whether the trueborn son of the rightful heir or the trueborn daughter of the last king, who is also the younger sister of the rightful heir, has precedence is very squirrely. Unfortunately, I suspect they'll solve the issue by just having them get married so it'll stop mattering.
---

Anagram posted...
The writers wouldn't have included that without planning to use it.

Dorne, Jorah's greyscale, Stannis, Tyrion killing Davos' son,...
---

RyoCaliente posted...

Anagram posted...
The writers wouldn't have included that without planning to use it.

Dorne, Jorah's greyscale, Stannis, Tyrion killing Davos' son,...

I still believe they planned more for Dorne and just aborted it because everyone hated it, and Tyrion killing Davos' son had about as much as could really be done with it done short of Davos going rogue to kill him. Stannis was wrapped up, unless you mean the weird way they cut Brienne's execution of him?

Jorah's grayscale, though, you've got me on that one.
---

Yeah I'm not expecting any kind of strife between the two over it.

If anything I expect more banging to come from it.
---

Jon would be the legitimate heir, yeah. Daenerys would be second to him.

Though one could make the argument that Jon's oath to the Night's Watch disinherited him since it explicitly does that. Of course, it's tricky because he didn't know it at the time. (Plus the whole died thing. Does that give him that back? It probably shouldn't because that's a terrible precedent but I mean it's a pretty extreme situation!)
---

I think all of Jon's indebtedness to the Night's Watch went away when he died, yeah.

Which is why he hasn't been executed for abandoning them and became the kingindanorf.
---

I guess it's similar to Joffrey being the heir instead of Jaime.

one thing I've been wondering though - if Cersei eats it, is Jaime next in line or does that house just fall?
---

I thought King's Guard couldn't hold titles either. Like wasn't there a whole thing where Tywin wanted Jamie to take The Rock, but he couldn't (and didn't want it anyway)?
---

transience posted...

I guess it's similar to Joffrey being the heir instead of Jaime.

one thing I've been wondering though - if Cersei eats it, is Jaime next in line or does that house just fall?

It's ridiculous that Cersei was in line at all, since she wasn't a Baratheon. That already throws the rules out the window, so eh.

Kingsguard and Night's Watch renounce their titles. You can later renounce your Kingsguard membership, which Tywin wanted Jaime to do and Jaime refused. You can't renounce your Night's Watch membership, but the oath technically specifies that you are released upon death, so Jon escaped on a technicality.
---

If his oath to the Night's Watch went away when he died, would his claim to the throne also have went away? Like he was rightful heir, he died, Dany becomes rightful heir, then he's alive again.
---

No, I know. And even agree to an extent. Him having died should have released him from his Night's Watch oath so he's free to hold titles, land, marry, etc.

What I'm less sure is if he regains the specific rights he gave up at the start. It's a little silly conducting this thought experiment because dying and coming back to life isn't really supposed to happen, but suppose the situation was a bit different and he gave up the rights when he took the oath, Daenerys took over because hey she was next on the list, but then Jon dies and comes back. The world moved on, does Jon just jump ahead of Daenerys again? Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen!

but again obviously westeros inheritance rules never took this kind of situation into account because it's crazy
---

mnkboy907 posted...

If his oath to the Night's Watch went away when he died, would his claim to the throne also have went away? Like he was rightful heir, he died, Dany becomes rightful heir, then he's alive again.

All of that is completely questionable and up for debate. It's the kind of thing wars are fought over.

Even better scenario: they beat the White Walkers and Dany agrees to let the North secede if Jon will renounce his claim to the rest of Westeros.
---

The presumed Baratheon line, if you bought into Joffrey and co being legit went: Robert, Joffrey, Tommen, Myrcella, Stannis, Shireen, Renly, ...? Actually might be Viserys, Daenerys because Robert's claim used the excuse of having a connection to the Targaryen line a few generations back.

Obviously the truth of the matter means you cut out Joffrey, Tommen, and Myrcella.

Cersei has no legitimate claim and the way I've reasoned this out is she's started a "new" dynasty with herself as the founder of the line. There are no heirs currently. Or more informally, she's made it a Lannister line. Jaime's Kingsguard oath should have disinherited him, and Tyrion's guilty verdict would have disinherited him. I'm sure there's a Lannister heir out there somewhere, but they're so far removed from this and honestly Cersei isn't thinking of them anyway.
---

xp1337 posted...

The presumed Baratheon line, if you bought into Joffrey and co being legit went: Robert, Joffrey, Tommen, Myrcella, Stannis, Shireen, Renly, ...? Actually might be Viserys, Daenerys because Robert's claim used the excuse of having a connection to the Targaryen line a few generations back.

Obviously the truth of the matter means you cut out Joffrey, Tommen, and Myrcella.

Cersei has no legitimate claim and the way I've reasoned this out is she's started a "new" dynasty with herself as the founder of the line. There are no heirs currently. Or more informally, she's made it a Lannister line. Jaime's Kingsguard oath should have disinherited him, and Tyrion's guilty verdict would have disinherited him. I'm sure there's a Lannister heir out there somewhere, but they're so far removed from this and honestly Cersei isn't thinking of them anyway.

It's questionable if Myrcella even goes above Stannis. Females always make it more complicated.
---

Did Cersei's last name not get legally changed to Baratheon when she married Robert?
---

Anagram posted...

It's questionable if Myrcella even goes above Stannis. Females always make it more complicated.

It's even more questionable because the Targaryens used a different variant of inheritence rules than the rest of Westeros. Nonetheless, I think it only involved descendants from a female heir which is avoided here since all the girls in the Baratheon line I listed there are direct descendants of male heirs.

Nonetheless, I'm about 95% sure Myrcella was ahead of Stannis provided you assumed she was legitimately Robert's daughter.
---

mnkboy907 posted...

Did Cersei's last name not get legally changed to Baratheon when she married Robert?

Everyone calls her Lannister still but presumably it was. But her power was derived via marriage. Legally control should not revert to her based on that, it would have to come through lineage which she does not have in this case.
---

mnkboy907 posted...

Did Cersei's last name not get legally changed to Baratheon when she married Robert?

Yes, but she specifically crowns herself as Cersei Lannister.
---

xp1337 posted...

It's even more questionable because the Targaryen's used a different variant of inheritence rules than the rest of Westeros. Nonetheless, I think it only involved descendents from a female heir which is avoided here since all the girls in the Baratheon line I listed there are direct descendants of male heirs.

Nonetheless, I'm about 95% sure Myrcella was ahead of Stannis provided you assumed she was legitimately Robert's daughter.

I disagree. Myrcella would have been ahead of Stannis only because everyone in Westeros hated Stannis except Ned.
---

I mean... Westeros had established inheritance laws! And I'm 95% sure it went: Sons > Daughters > Brothers

Or to use a Greyjoy example: Theon > Yara > Euron; except for the fact that they voted on it instead.
---

xp1337 posted...

I mean... Westeros had established inheritance laws! And I'm 95% sure it went: Sons > Daughters > Brothers

Or to use a Greyjoy example: Theon > Yara > Euron; except for the fact that they voted on it instead.

It was specifically mentioned that the Iron Islands have never had a queen. Unless every previous king has zero daughters or at least one son each, you'd only need one king with a daughter and no sons to have had at least one queen.

Besides, the Iron Islands also don't follow normal inheritance rules and no one in Westeros likes them. They clearly have their own wacky system of voting.
---

Jon is older than Dany
---

EndOfDiscOne posted...

Jon is older than Dany

Do we know that for sure?

I thought Daenerys was older... but that it was really close. The Tower of Joy took place at the very end of the Rebellion, after KL had fallen. Daenerys was born on Dragonstone and also at the end of the war, but given they would have had to flee when KL fell I always figured she was born first, if only slightly.
---

I dunno about the show, but I believe the books start with Jon at 14 and Dany at 13.
---

The books gave me pause, yeah. But I couldn't remember if Jon was given an age there. (Also couldn't recall if we knew precisely if Daenerys's first few chapters were taking place at the same time or could have been a bit earlier than the main Westeros stuff)
---

Dany is older. In Ned's Tower of Joy flashback he mentions that Willem Darry had already fled Dragonstone, so Dany was already born at that point. Of course, in the books we don't know if Jon had already been born at that point but in the show Dany is older.

Actually, rereading the passage, Ned only mentions he knows Willem Darry fled TO Dragonstone, so I guess you can argue about it.

Here's the passage (in spoilers for if anyone hasn't read the book yet and wants to)


"I looked for you on the Trident," Ned said to them.
"We were not there," Ser Gerold answered.
"Woe to the Usurper if we had been," said Ser Oswell.
"When King's Landing fell, Ser Jaime slew your king with a golden sword, and I wondered where you were."
"Far away," Ser Gerold said, "or Aerys would yet sit the Iron Throne, and our false brother would burn in seven hells."
"I came down on Storm's End to lift the siege," Ned told them, and the Lords Tyrell and Redwyne dipped their banners, and all their knights bent the knee to pledge us fealty. I was certain you would be among them."
"Our knees do not bend easily," said Ser Arthur Dayne.
"Ser Willem Darry is fled to Dragonstone, with your queen and Prince Viserys. I thought you might have sailed with him."
"Ser Willem is a good man and true," said Ser Oswell.
"But not of the Kingsguard," Ser Gerold pointed out. "The Kingsguard does not flee."
"Then or now," said Ser Arthur. He donned his helm.
"We swore a vow," explained old Ser Gerold.
Ned's wraiths moved up beside him, with shadow swords in hand. They were seven against three.
"And now it begins," said Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning. He unsheathed Dawn and held it with both hands. The blade was pale as milkglass, alive with light.
"No," Ned said with sadness in his voice. "Now it ends."

---

Also they def would make Dany older in the show if only because all the shit she goes through season 1 would NOT fly in the tv realm if she was as young as she was in the books
---

No way is Dany older in the books. GRRM explicitly said Jon is older and he doesn't lie about stuff like that.
---

I just read the first book. Jon is fourteen at the start and Dany is thirteen. She turns fourteen early on.
---

Yeah, after checking the ASOIAF wiki, it states Jon was born in 283 AC and Dany in 284 AC. Because I recently read AGOT and misread that passage, I was confused.
---

Ah, okay then!
---

The legality of the crown doesn't matter at ALL. As long as the public accepts a certain ruler that's all it takes. Lineage helps for that but isn't really necessary at all.
---

In the books, they're 14 and 13 respectively at the beginning. In the show, I tend to think he's about 18 and she's 19. I don't know, it just feels right to me somehow. Always has.

The bigger question is: how old are they now? How many years have passed in the show? So hard to say. I'm thinking maybe four, but the actors are clearly my age (almost to a tee, in fact; just a bit older).
---

It's too bad we don't know how fast Dragons age
From a egg to a fucking beast in just 4 years sounds insane, but who are we to know
---

xp1337 posted...

bran walks

dude
---

RyoCaliente posted...

Dany is older. In Ned's Tower of Joy flashback he mentions that Willem Darry had already fled Dragonstone, so Dany was already born at that point. Of course, in the books we don't know if Jon had already been born at that point but in the show Dany is older.

Actually, rereading the passage, Ned only mentions he knows Willem Darry fled TO Dragonstone, so I guess you can argue about it.

Here's the passage (in spoilers for if anyone hasn't read the book yet and wants to)


"I looked for you on the Trident," Ned said to them.
"We were not there," Ser Gerold answered.
"Woe to the Usurper if we had been," said Ser Oswell.
"When King's Landing fell, Ser Jaime slew your king with a golden sword, and I wondered where you were."
"Far away," Ser Gerold said, "or Aerys would yet sit the Iron Throne, and our false brother would burn in seven hells."
"I came down on Storm's End to lift the siege," Ned told them, and the Lords Tyrell and Redwyne dipped their banners, and all their knights bent the knee to pledge us fealty. I was certain you would be among them."
"Our knees do not bend easily," said Ser Arthur Dayne.
"Ser Willem Darry is fled to Dragonstone, with your queen and Prince Viserys. I thought you might have sailed with him."
"Ser Willem is a good man and true," said Ser Oswell.
"But not of the Kingsguard," Ser Gerold pointed out. "The Kingsguard does not flee."
"Then or now," said Ser Arthur. He donned his helm.
"We swore a vow," explained old Ser Gerold.
Ned's wraiths moved up beside him, with shadow swords in hand. They were seven against three.
"And now it begins," said Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning. He unsheathed Dawn and held it with both hands. The blade was pale as milkglass, alive with light.
"No," Ned said with sadness in his voice. "Now it ends."

Very clear from this passage that Dany is not born yet due to him mentioning Viserys and not her.
---

Well yes, because Viserys fled to Dragonstone and Dany was born there. I thought it said "fled FROM Dragonstone". At that point, Ned would have no idea that Dany was born on Dragonstone, because nobody had been there to see/know it.
---

RyoCaliente posted...

Here's the passage

even though the conclusion was wrong, i loved that you reposted this passage. gonna read it again.
---

Anagram posted...

Besides, the Iron Islands also don't follow normal inheritance rules and no one in Westeros likes them. They clearly have their own wacky system of voting.

female rulers might be different, but the kingsmoot hadn't been held in centuries before the asha/euron one, due to the ironborn bending the knee to aegon and no longer even being kings
---

SeabassDebeste posted...

RyoCaliente posted...

Here's the passage

even though the conclusion was wrong, i loved that you reposted this passage. gonna read it again.

See I actually thought "now it begins/now it ends" was added in by TV because it seemed such a Hollywood line. Weird.
---

it's considerably more beautiful in prose (pale as milkglass, alive with light), but book 1 was by far the most hollywood-ish, imo. lots more coincidences to drive the plot forward, lots of made-for-tv quotes like tyrion's advice to jon.
---

I loved the TV version of that scene except for the part where we had to wait 5 years to see it.

Anyway the timeline in the books has had four years added to it. All characters are 3-4 years older with a couple of obvious exceptions like Missandei. This also goes for the adults.

Honestly it's not just what would be appropriate, GRRM admits he made a mistake about the ages of maturity over time.
---

yeah, awesome adaptation there. and we never "see" the fight in the books. that was awesome choreography.
---