[Game of Thrones] Season Seven

Other than the affiliation with dragons, I don't know, I don't really care. Nothing special about the Targs. It would legitimize Jon Snow though and make him not a b*stard and the rightful heir to the throne in some people's minds. For Tyrion it would do the reverse, switch him from a noble born heir into a high born b*stard that he was always treated as.

 

With three Dragons Dany could just burn all the WW.

 

But there is a dwarf dragon. Why do you want to take away from the magnificent creature and not want him to flourish as real full grown fire breathing dragon with a little dwarf on his back? Just picture it.

 

By the way @heypartner I didn't mean your post was dumb, just that the it's dumb if Tyrion ends up as a Targ. How much over complication can they create? (By they I mean both the show and the books here as it would be true in both if in either) You're a Targ! You're a Targ! everyone's a Targ!

 

Your math is off. 13 1 hr episodes would mean 3 movies would be over 4 hours each.

 

So make it a Fast and Furious franchise. Point is it would make money in the movies.

 

I agree. When they were in the gave together in the last episode it appeared as if she were almost pleading with him so she could defend him, almost out of a desperate need to protect him. At the table when Jon read the scroll and Daenerys told him she hadn't decided if he could leave, it seemed more out of a desperate need for him to stay. When he left and she said she had grown use to the King of the North it was obvious she was going to miss him for personal reasons.

 

I would actually disagree with you. A large army scattered across a large area with the leadership in the center might be easy to take advantage of by a very small party. Remember what Ramsey Bolton did to Stannis's army with his very small band of men. He released most of their horses, set many of their tents on fire and cause massive chaos and no-one so much as took a scratch.

 

Is it better to be a b*stard on someone accused and guilty of patricide?

 

LOL, yes I remember the stupid "few good men" story with Ramsay.

However, the army of the dead isn't the army of Stannis. They basically operate under psychological control of those leaders. Jon saw that. They stop attacking when the leader wants them to, they move super fast, etc. There's no way the Jon who was at Hardhome would think it would be a reasonable plan to take a group of 10 people or whatever to "kidnap" a wight in those conditions.

 

Gorilla warfare has actually been an effective strategy against opponents with superior odds throughout the history of man. They only have to get close enough to the exterior border of the group to snag one or possible make them chase them back to the wall where they drag one through the gate and close it before the White Walkers can get there. All theories on my part but it's not supposed to be easy.

 

They can't outrun these guys.

Come on man haha.

If they get into a chasing situation where the humans are running through massive snow drifts, a raging blizzard, etc. that would be a worst case scenario.

 

It sounds like you have already come up with reasons not to like the coming episode. No problem, to each his own. For me personally its been the greatest series in the history of TV and I'm and pretty psyched for the next episode.

 

I agree with you that it's a great show and probably the greatest at least as far as my enjoyment. I'm also excited for the next episode because I'm sure it will be HIGHLY entertaining, but that doesn't mean I can't admit the plot device used to get this group together and give them a confrontation with the White Walkers is dumb. It is dumb. It will be great tv when the confrontation happens, but only an idiot who had never seen the army of the dead would think the strategy they are undertaking is a good one.

If anything they should go north of the wall and kill a prisoner to turn them into a wight and then bring him back. That wouldn't be exciting tv though so I guess I'm glad they went the illogical way.

 

Dany sure has been focused on Jon taking the knife in the heart. She's keeps asking about it. Starting to think....

Spoiler: Just a hunch

That the way she finds out about it as when she sees it before he sticks her with his Longclaw

 

Well, according to Tormund...

Spoiler

the claw isn't very long.

 

Just checking in to say I am enjoying @justtxyank's use of the word "dumb," whether or not I agree. LOL.

What I do think is dumb is the fan theory that each dragon needs a rider. Or that we have to find three riders somehow.

 

I don't really think that's a theory, but more from the stories they were told of the last time Dragons existed, and three Targs rode them.

 

Okay, fair enough. I'm swayed too much by the torching of the fleet I guess.

 

To me, it's not a theory. It is a desire to see a repeat of history. The Targaryens first mounted three dragons during the original War of Conquest when Aegon I and his two sisters melted Harrenhal and roasted the largest army ever assembled at the Field of Fire. Notice how they have reigns to better direct the fire.





Little tidbit of background. The Targaryens weren't the only family with dragons. They were just the only Valyrian family to survive the cataclysmic "Doom of Valyria" with their dragons.