Author: stevenattewell

How quickly can a ship be built — or a fleet? I’m thinking of course about Euron’s new Ironborn fleet on the show, but also of Cersei’s dromonds in the books.

Ships take time to build, and one of the genuine pillars of Braavos’ strength is that its Arsenal can build a war galley in a day thanks to standardized parts and assembly line production.

In AFFC, it takes about three weeks for King’s Landing to build three dromonds, so building an entire new Royal Fleet of 100 ships from scratch would take two years. Presumably the fleet that Stannis built in the nine months between the fall of King’s Landing and the assault on Dragonstone was smaller than 100 ships.

So, the High Sparrow is a hypocrite?

opinions-about-tiaras:

racefortheironthrone:

opinions-about-tiaras:

racefortheironthrone:

How so?

I think, but do not know, that this refers to the Faith’s centuries-old habit of blessing Targaryen incest but withholding their blessing from Lannister incest.

The High Sparrow cannot personally be a hypocrite in this regard, as he was not there, but the Faith as a whole absolutely is.

There were extenuating circumstances in the form of giant fire-breathing murdersauruses, of course.

And I think the High Sparrow would absolutely admit that the Faith has been hypocritical in that regard – his whole agenda is based on an argument that the Faith has been corrupted by secular politics and needs to reassert its independence to as to pursue an agenda of moral reform. 

Might it be rather convenient for the High Sparrow that Aegon VI is the product of a normal marriage to a non-related woman and not the usual Targaryen policy of making sure the family tree does not branch?

Does a “cloth dragon swayed on poles amidst a cheering crowd” suggest that Aegon VI might get backing from someone very, very popular with the smallfolk of King’s Landing? 

So, the High Sparrow is a hypocrite?

opinions-about-tiaras:

racefortheironthrone:

How so?

I think, but do not know, that this refers to the Faith’s centuries-old habit of blessing Targaryen incest but withholding their blessing from Lannister incest.

The High Sparrow cannot personally be a hypocrite in this regard, as he was not there, but the Faith as a whole absolutely is.

There were extenuating circumstances in the form of giant fire-breathing murdersauruses, of course.

And I think the High Sparrow would absolutely admit that the Faith has been hypocritical in that regard – his whole agenda is based on an argument that the Faith has been corrupted by secular politics and needs to reassert its independence to as to pursue an agenda of moral reform. 

Given past animosity, is it unusual for a Dornishperson such as Edric Dayne to be squiring for a Stormlander like Beric Dondarrion? Is such a thing a sign of old wounds healing during the reign of King Robert?

Not that unusual – the stony Dornish and Marcher lords intermarry fairly frequently to settle vendettas, but it doesn’t work out any better than it does for the Brackens and Blackwoods. Edric’s squiring is part and parcel of the marriage alliance with Allyria. 

So I got into The Adventure Zone recently…

And it’s rekindled my love of creating oddball D&D characters. Some characters I’m fiddling around with now:

  • A Shade from the Warhammer Fantasy Dark Elves who got left behind on a raid and is now hiding out pretending to be a “good" elf ranger who works as a guide/scout for adventuring parties…except he’s not very good at pretending. Something about the way that he doesn’t so much live in harmony with nature but cow it into submission, or maybe it’s the suspiciously long canines and his collection of humanoid hunting trophies, or maybe his habit of targeting the most powerful enemies he encounters, killing them, and eating parts of them to gain their strength. My attempt to create an evil character who doesn’t steal from or try to kill party members.
  • An ex-soldier turned philosopher paladin who’s completely uninterested in treasure or glory, but adventures so that he can ask as many different creatures important questions about how one leads a good life, or why war exists, or whether objective moral alignment systems make sense. Totally uninterested in gold or magical items – trying to make the Vow of Poverty work from an RP perspective – but will collect any and all historical and philisophical tomes he encounters. 
  • “Honest” Tomas Rhymer, half-elf rogue/fey pact warlock. Inspired by Moist von Lipwig, he’s a mostly pacifist con artist who got on the wrong side of a powerful Archfey, the Duchess of the Dark Side of the Moon. As a result, his soul has been hidden somewhere in the world and he has a year and a day to get it back…but to make things interesting, he’s been unwillingly declared the Duchess’ judicial champion, so that any spats she gets into with her fellow powerful supernatural beings means he gets unexpectedly attacked by horrible monsters to settle the dispute. If he wins the fight, the Duchess sometimes sends him a clue as to where his soul might be…

So what exactly was the purpose of Sansa not telling Jon that she may have secured heavy cavalry from the Vale? And surely she could’ve had the sense to get Baelish to send a raven in answer telling them that they could count on the Vale. Was it the writers simply wanting to surprise the viewers? Even Aragorn knew that the Rohirrim would show at Pelennor Fields but it didn’t cheapen the moment in book or movie when Theoden arrives.

As far as I can see, it was pretty much done for a dramatic twist:

And partly to setup the whole Jon vs. Sansa plot in a very stupid manner. 

Why are Cersei’s kids considered “abominations”? Tommen and Myrcella are children who have done absolutely nothing wrong, and even Joffrey can’t be blamed for his conception. Is there a historical parallel here or is this an example of GRRM making use of values dissonance?

quesada93:

goodqueenaly:

Indeed. Catelyn makes explicit why they’re considered abominations:

racefortheironthrone:

I think what you’re missing here is the connotation of “abomination,” which is religious in origin, whether we’re taking the original Latin meaning of an ill omen or how the word was used to translate from the Hebrew word “sheqets” which means ritually unclean or forbidden, taboo.

From this perspective, it doesn’t matter what Joffrey, Tommen, and Myrcella have done, it’s not a question of their culpability for an action, because in their very existence they are a violation of the laws of the Old Gods and the New. Hence why in the books the High Sparrow refused to give his blessing to Tommen without being “convinced” that the story isn’t true, because to do otherwise would be to taint the spiritual purity of the Sept of Baelor. 

If the boy was truly Jaime’s seed, Robert would have put him to death along with his mother, and few would have condemned him. Bastards were common enough, but incest was a monstrous sin to both old gods and new, and the children of such wickedness were named abominations in sept and godswood alike. 

The persons Joffrey, Myrcella, and Tommen were or have become are immaterial. The moment they were conceived, those three children were the products of a “monstrous sin” in the eyes of both faiths.

Is there anything in the books that reconciles the Church’s view on children being born of incest as abominations with the Targaryens long history of incestuous marriages?

The Revolt of the Faithful against “King Abomination” (King Aenys I) and its bloody repression.