Meredith Quill

Dank memes & more incoming! 👑 ❤️ 🤣🤣🤣

A number of posts have been removed due to mentioning a political figure or quoting a post that does so. This is a clear violation of the site's politics policy. Further violations will result in warnings or suspensions.

Quite so. Those siblings have shown no fondness for each other, let alone anyone else who isn't... them.

10,000 Ships I'd like to see Aegon the Conqueror's story.

So do we think that they'll not follow the GOT mechanic of having ep 9 be the 'big' episode each season then?

If any posts which have spoiler tags remain in the thread it means the content therein is not actually a spoiler. However, in an over-abundance of caution, our advice is to treat this situation as you would a preview trailer and not click tags if you don't watch trailers.

No spoilery book talk even in tags, in here please.

Which confirms to me that the first real act of war, aka atrocity, committed by the Green's will most likely happen this season. 😬😳😭

Their legitimacy cannot merely be 'taken away at any moment' unless the monarch decreed it, which as every.one.also.knows, Viserys will not do. You mentioned in another post how the monarch can legitimise bastards, which means in theory, Rhaenyra could legitimise her boys once she became monarch if she wanted to - instant solution to any noble handwringing. I'm not saying she would be wise to or should, merely that she could. This isn't about her kids 🤨. It's about having Aegon take the throne instead of her because 1. In the realm; she's a female, and so regardless of whether she had 10, 20, 50 unquestionable legitimate heirs, she doesn't own a cock. The fact that there's suspicion in the realm about her kids legitimacy only fuels that already smoldering fire. 2. In the Hightowers view; apparently the mere fact that she's a female heir has always presented an inevitable mortal threat to Alicent's sons regardless of friendships or relationships involved. The question of her kids legitimacy is a mere pretext upon which to hang any rebellion for those already predisposed to it due to the above.

I'll bet that it isn't with their first either as it's an approx 6yr time jump, so probably their second or even third...?

Yeah, he's meant to be around his mid-teens right? He looks at least early to mid twenties!

As you said yourself, as book readers in here we know the main beats that happen and what Daemon does and doesn't do, as well as how it all turns out in the end so to speculate any differently seems weird.

As someone who hinges her entire identity as being someone who plays by the rules, she's a hypocrite for not applying the same standards to her associates merely because their actions benefit her own cause. If she were so thoroughly 'this is right and that is wrong' in her beliefs, she would have 1. Had Krispy Kreme sentenced to death for forsaking his vow, let alone murdering a noble at a royal function. How is that on Viserys?? He is ignorant of Krispy Kreme's vow breaking? Additionally, Krispy Kreme asked to be put to death lol. If you're referring to Joffrey's murder, aka his second act that warranted him being put to death, then you've shot yourself in the foot with that argument as the show telegraphed - by giving us no other alternative logical explanation and only showing Alicent preventing what Krispy was going to do - that she must have intervened on Krispy's behalf in the aftermath. Ergo, her double-standards at play yet again 2. Had Larys thrown in the black cells immediately upon learning of his murdering his father and brother. If you believe that either of those actions would have been ill-advised, at the very bloody least, THE VERY LEAST, she should have distanced herself from those people... rather than remain in deep cahoots with them, lol. Why are we speaking of proof? Lol, this isn't modern earth, this is fantasy world and dependent wholly upon what rules the writers decide to apply. If we go down the path of things making sense...so many actions and behaviours would require questioning; for example, how is it possible that Alicent could attack, with a lethal weapon no less, and injure the heir to the throne, a princess of blood royal, in front of multiple witnesses including the king himself, with zero consequences?!?!?? And, lest we forget, this was after defying the king, attempting to overrule the king and when that failed, stealing the king's own blade from the king's person. Regardless of the king's feelings on the matter, in a world that made actual sense, his courtiers alone would call for some form of punitive measure. So speaking of proof matters not here. So I posit, her word, as queen consort, that Larys confessed would be enough because this is Larys and not someone of equal or higher station. Even if we put all that aside, now that Otto is Hand once more, you really think she couldn't ridiculously easily have him throw Larys into the black cells??? Please don't retort that Otto would refuse because it does benefit team Green - that isn't the point, the point is Alicent, who portrays herself as someone who plays by the rules, could have been shown to try acting according to the rules/her own *highly risible self-righteous moral standards in this regard but clearly that was never going to happen. #LOLhypocrite I actually lol'ed whilst writing this.

Laenor was as much a part of that scheme and they're his parents, so...yeah. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

And Alicent gave tacit approval to three murders by continuing to associate with the murderers and not holding them accountable. You could argue that Rhaenyra's action of marrying someone who she knows murdered someone is more forgivable because she has an emotional attachment to him despite his behaviour. You could also argue that there's no such emotion involved in Alicent's association with two murderers, which makes her choice a more coldly calculated one. Moreover, I have little doubt that other folks could find an opposing rationale for each of them. However, I think it fairly futile to argue that either of them are better or worse in this regard as both are treading on dubious moral ground at this point.

Both are equally bad at face value, however, when one of the two is a kinslayer to two family members who were never shown to have any beef between them... that's heinous. Small correction, you have it the wrong way round, it was Lucerys that slashed Aemond.

My response ignored neither. You asked what it could mean, I provided synonyms. Simply because you may have disregarded them doesn't mean they're not viable.

We can only comment on what actually transpired on the show. I'm not going to create other equally hypothetical scenarios to prove a point.

Seriously though, the way the show has chosen to have older Aemond appear - tell me you're a villain without telling me you're a villain. Lol, I see you show.

I don't think it could mean literally anything but obviously it could be a synonym for many things like, 'pointedly', 'harshly', 'strictly' - which is how I took it at the time tbh.

Older Aegon looks nothing like his younger self. Based on appearance alone, I far preferred Ty Tennant in the role. Aemond One-Eye now looks like a classic villain lol.

Hmm, let's see, just because something may or may not be true doesn't indicate it isn't said spitefully aka talking shit. So, prior to any violent reaction; 1. "Your mother is dead" to children who literally just buried their mother that day - if you don't see why that is spiteful then I don't know what to tell you. 2. The pig comment - how is that 'truth'? After the fighting began, he continued to shit talk; 1. The you will die like your father comment - more truth? 2. Calling them bastards (whether true or not this was a spiteful comment designed to hurt and demean aka shit talking). Shit talking is as much about intent and context rather than looking at the words spoken in a vacuum, but I'm sure you already know that.

That's a head scratcher... Ok fine, I'll get my coat.

I refer you to my previous statement; chat shit, get hit. Something that still applies in the world today to a large extent (rightly or wrongly). How about asking for a child's eye to be plucked out? Are there any excuses for that? Is that pure, plain evil? Asking for a friend.

My memory is sketchy - does he lead the Wolves or some northern force? No? If not, perhaps they'll have him do it. I wouldn't judge these the same as dumb and dumber, Ryan Condal is a massive asoiaf fan and GRRM and he consult often from what I've read/seen, and he appears to want to keep GRRM on side.