Amph Game Of Thrones (uh i guess it's done now? Edit: No!)

This is yet another instance of terrible writing. We were told the Dothraki were deployed against the Night King. None of them survived. Only Jorah rode back. In the dinner among survivors, none of them were present.

Later one random line is inserted incredibly suggesting that “half” are alive and apparently in fighting condition. Is the implication then that in the perilous battle to rescue all mankind, 50% just didn’t participate? Or that they were militarily demolished without being killed or even wounded? Did they stop participating 10 minutes into the episode because they just went on strike?

What possible explanation is there? Yes the characters said something. Something that was facially dumb and contradictory to what we saw onscreen. What justification is there for this sloppiness?

 

They were out there fighting, then turned around. Jorah was not the only one, he's just the one we saw close up and followed back.

 

Half of them did, sj? 50%? One out of every two?

That’s not even a battle. It’s just outright desertion/revolt. You seriously think that’s it’s more plausible that this happened with no repercussions and then they all happily rejoined the leader they just abandoned? This is more likely to you than the writers just making a mistake, even though we have hard evidence they’ve made several?

 

Now that the show is over, I am thinking of getting into the novels. I've heard that it's best to just read the first three, for now, and wait to see if the sixth one does indeed come out someday before committing to reading the fourth and fifth installments. Does anyone here who has read the whole agree/disagree with that approach?

 

I disagree. Just read them all.

 

Read them all.

 

I'm on the 5th one. Read them all.

Also beating a tactical retreat is not the same thing as desertion.

 

GRRM's editor has said she only knows the fate of one character in the books: Bran. Before this season, you can find several videos of people using book evidence on why Bran is meant to be King. With the invasion of the Others, it would stand that that would convince many of the truth behind the religion of the North and the Old Gods. Perhaps the new capital isn't a rebuilt King's Landing, but a rebuilt Harrenhal, on the shores of God's Eye where the Isle of Faces lies.

If we're going simply by where characters are right now in the books, Jon is dead and Dany is stranded and surrounded by Dothraki, Arya's a Faceless Man in training, Sansa is a pawn of Littlefinger, and Cersei was just shamed by the High Sparrow.

 

Yes. Jon is dead, but there are major hints of his consciousness' survival and his body's resurrection. He isn't going to be come back and carry on as though nothing has happened; it will not be irrelevant to later developments. Sansa is Littlefinger's pawn, but she will not ever be married off to Ramsay Bolton. Cersei isn't going to be Queen in her own right. Arya isn't going to be some super ninja who single-handedly massacres whole houses. Dany isn't going to earn Dothraki loyalty by burning down their holiest site.

I have read many, many book theories, but I have never heard of the Bran is meant to be king theory. I would like to see that using only book evidence. I suspect it either uses show material or is Preston Jacobs-level bat**** or just plain dumb like "Cleganebowl."

And religion is not based on evidence, otherwise religion would be dead in our world. The Faith of the Seven isn't going away because of the Others. The religion of the Old Gods isn't entirely factual either; greenseers are not gods, praying to weirwoods doesn't do anything.

 

Why is everybody so skeptical about him finishing the books? He has been stuck for a while, but after all he just has to publish the one he is currently writing and then write another one. He's not that old.

 

70 is pretty old especially for his pace.

 

My point is that I doubt Bran is going to stay in that cave forever.
And "signs"/"miracles" matter in religion.

 

He managed to publish the first three books at distances of two years. If he gets the self-confidence boost for ending Winds of Winter, say in 2020, it doesn't sound such a crazy challenge to use less than 5 years to write the last one.

 

What does “tactical retreat” mean in an existential battle where you make no attempt to try and come back to help?

This like that Key and Peele skit about the meaning of the words “literally” and “figuratively.”

 

Also: read the Dunk and Egg stories. And World of Fire and Ice. And Fire and Blood.

 

Also: use that time to get interested in a different series/author because nothing from the mainline ASOIAF universe is ever coming out again.

 

Um no, it's exactly like the retreat that was called for where the Northmen and Unsullied fell back into the castle. The Dothraki just did the same.

 

The rest of those groups continued to fight after their initial retreat. The Dothraki just disappeared for over an episode.

 

To be fair as well I felt that during that charge in Winterfell whilst there were a lot of Dothraki there didn't look like 100,000. You could argue that perhaps some were kept as a reserve for a counter attack but not used when it was obvious they'd be ineffective. We don't really get a view of the latter stages of the entire battle and I don't think its unreasonable to believe the Dead are most interested in getting to Bran so overrun Winterfell in that direction leaving other parts of it less pressured.

I don't think their fate is mentioned because its easier to imagine they just return to Essos, Greyworm and the Unsuillied on the other hand don't have such an obvious plot and needed some explanation.