Sean Bean heads cast for HBO's A Game of Thrones


Television

3,001 to 3,036 of 3,036 << first < prev | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | next > last >>

David knott 242 wrote:
Storyteller Shadow wrote:
Best episode of the season but does Vaerys no longer have a spy network?

Do you remember the episode where Qyburn took over the "little birds"?

Bit of a late reply here but I was under the impression he took over the little birds in King's Landing not the entire Country at large.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A Song of Vanilla Ice and Fire. Oh my goodness, that was amazing.

Sovereign Court

I know all the realms problems were conveniently solved in a 5 min conversation, but im still wondering how exactly the "wheel has been broken"? There is still a king, a small counsel, and Jon may have abandoned his watch to be a wildling, possibly keeping the Targ bloodline alive. What part of the wheel exactly was broken?

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Pan wrote:
I know all the realms problems were conveniently solved in a 5 min conversation, but im still wondering how exactly the "wheel has been broken"? There is still a king, a small counsel, and Jon may have abandoned his watch to be a wildling, possibly keeping the Targ bloodline alive. What part of the wheel exactly was broken?

Dynastic Succession. That's about it.


Which is an element of the real world that GRRM may be trying to echo. Obviously, the history of England is significantly different (excluding the fantasy elements immediately, just looking at human politics), but I've seen interesting parallels people are drawing to Cromwell's war. Lots, and lots of differences, but the sentiment of dethroning the royals and establishing a larger ruling elite.

I think there's a good chance the books will have a very different feel to them. For one, I wonder if the order of events isn't transposed (Dany's attack on King's Landing happens before going north). You can have the same people die at each location, but the feel of the story would change dramatically. Especially if everyone dies in the same location, then Bran's warging ability (or Jon's) could become way more important with regards to the dragons.

Interestingly though, as I consider this, the above order works better for the TV show, while the TV shows order works better for the books. Having the final battle against the white walkers followed by a bunch of political chapters works to help wrap up the books, but for the show, the biggest stuff had to be at the end. Killing the NK in ep 3 was a poor choice in that it made part of the rest of the season feel anti-climatic, but with a book it's easier to spend time on the falling action and see the consequences.


Going with 'Lich King Bran', BookBran's speaking through time is more obvious since both Ned Stark hears voices in the Godswood and Dany hears the grass whispering to her. ShowBran also wargs Hodor in the past and whispers to Ned at the Tower of Joy. So this can point to Bran influencing Dany(and the Mad King) towards a role where they become conquerors in order to fight the Night King. Dany never learns to becomes a queen and (as suggested by Tyrion) stay in Mereen since it is her home. She instead heads across the sea and ends up sacrificed to the schemes of the Three Eyed Raven against the Night King.

Bran, leave Drogon alone. let him be a dragon off across the sea.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

If Dany attacked King's Landing before heading north to Winterfell, she would never get to Winterfell at all since it is her treatment of King's Landing that got her killed.

If Dany somehow took King's Landing soon after her arrival in Westeros and without unnecessary burning of civilians, it would have changed the final part of the story beyond recognition. I don't think Martin was even considering an ending where Dany became the benevolent ruler and savior of Westeros.


David knott 242 wrote:

If Dany attacked King's Landing before heading north to Winterfell, she would never get to Winterfell at all since it is her treatment of King's Landing that got her killed.

If Dany somehow took King's Landing soon after her arrival in Westeros and without unnecessary burning of civilians, it would have changed the final part of the story beyond recognition. I don't think Martin was even considering an ending where Dany became the benevolent ruler and savior of Westeros.

I don't buy your first premise at all. The North is desperate for allies. A crazy lady with a couple dragons is still a useful ally against the white walkers. It's also her chance to offer a carrot, instead of just a stick.

Also, there's a distinct possibility of bringing the dragons North without her (if she's dead). For one, Jon is Targaryen. This is most likely the best explanation in the show for why the dragons let him ride, and why Drogon doesn't kill him. His Targaryen blood makes him a suitable master. Second, in the books, Jon can warg. Even if he can only warg into Ghost, or a similarly bonded animal, it's very possible that when Bran achieves his final form that warging into a dragon is possible. If events are reversed, and Dany is already dead, then Bran saves the realms of men by controlling a dragon. Who better to be the new king than the person who saved humanity almost single-handedly? Third, there is a horn that can magically control dragons. Currently Victarion has it.

If you can't come up with ways to solve this situation, you just aren't thinking hard enough, I came up with 3 in just 2 minutes.

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

Victarian has a horn that alledgedly controls dragons. He will probably die blowing the horn.

But yeah, I can see the KL stuff going down first. Jon was more than willing to beg Lannister help in the War against the dead. Him beseeching a crazed dragon queen that just fought against Cersei (who kind of just eradicated the upper leadership of the official religion of the westerosi nobility) and her maybe-not-other-nephew in a three way melee in KL isn't a stretch.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

It is a stretch because Dany would not be killed by Jon if she rescued Winterfell after sacking King's Landing. It is as much of a plot changer as Ned Stark keeping his head would be.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I think this blog on the Scientific American site pretty well nails it.

Also, the differences in storytelling style between the books and the TV show really matter here. In the books, the story is told from different points of view. Daenerys burning King's Landing would be less of a surprise there as we would see her thoughts right up until the end.

In contrast, the TV show has no explicit POV (an advantage, if they want to show something that none of the POV characters witnessed) and no way to show inner thoughts (a disadvantage, if they fail to bring those out in actions or conversations). There were clues about Dany being not such a good person all along, but they were somewhat ambiguous until Dany actually burned King's Landing. I do recall how different episode 5 looked to me when I saw it for the second time immediately before the finale.

Even in episode 6, Dany could have gotten away with what she did as an initial atrocity straight out of Machiavelli's book -- but Jon's hand was forced when he realized that she was not going to simply take the throne and rule over a cowed population as The Prince would have recommended.


David knott 242 wrote:

If Dany attacked King's Landing before heading north to Winterfell, she would never get to Winterfell at all since it is her treatment of King's Landing that got her killed.

If Dany somehow took King's Landing soon after her arrival in Westeros and without unnecessary burning of civilians, it would have changed the final part of the story beyond recognition. I don't think Martin was even considering an ending where Dany became the benevolent ruler and savior of Westeros.

The latter case is interesting, because indeed the story in the books will be different beyond recognition:

Spoiler:
In the novels, the endpoint of the saga is the battle against the Others (White Walkers on the show); the battle for the Iron Throne will be resolved first, as per GRRM himself (many, many times). Throw in Aegon VI and the Golden Company marching on King's Landing long before Dany can reach Westeros, and the story in the novels is not going to bear a huge amount of relevance to the TV show.

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
David knott 242 wrote:
There were clues about Dany being not such a good person all along, but they were somewhat ambiguous until Dany actually burned King's Landing.

Somewhat ambiguous? She threatened to burn Qarth to the ground way back in season two when she was denied entry. The only reason she didn't was that her dragons were far too small at the time. People who didn't realize she had this dark side to her all along only saw what they wanted to see because her advisors had been keeping her in check all this time. You know, those advisors who by episode 805 were all dead or who had failed/betrayed her.

This video has some great points, the main one being that many people are confusing what doesn't work for what they didn't want.


Werthead wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:

If Dany attacked King's Landing before heading north to Winterfell, she would never get to Winterfell at all since it is her treatment of King's Landing that got her killed.

If Dany somehow took King's Landing soon after her arrival in Westeros and without unnecessary burning of civilians, it would have changed the final part of the story beyond recognition. I don't think Martin was even considering an ending where Dany became the benevolent ruler and savior of Westeros.

The latter case is interesting, because indeed the story in the books will be different beyond recognition: ** spoiler omitted **

"She killed bad people and we cheered' Yea, pretty much straight from the producers to us. We gotta remember that the show has been filled with those who commit atrocities. Twiyn had the Riverlands devastated, The slavers and Dorthaki commit rape and slavery as easy as breathing and Dany burns those who cross her. Dany is getting particular focus though


Fumarole wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:
There were clues about Dany being not such a good person all along, but they were somewhat ambiguous until Dany actually burned King's Landing.

Somewhat ambiguous? She threatened to burn Qarth to the ground way back in season two when she was denied entry. The only reason she didn't was that her dragons were far too small at the time. People who didn't realize she had this dark side to her all along only saw what they wanted to see because her advisors had been keeping her in check all this time. You know, those advisors who by episode 805 were all dead or who had failed/betrayed her.

This video has some great points, the main one being that many people are confusing what doesn't work for what they didn't want.

I think there's a difference between threatening to burn a city because your people will starve to death in the desert if they don't get in, to burning a city even after its already surrendered to you. The former is a very morally ambiguous decision born from sympathetic desperation that the audience can somewhat relate to, while the other is blatantly Stupid Evil act made by a crazy person.

I can't speak for anyone else but I think most peoples problem with Dany's turn isn't necessary because they wanted her to be a conventional heroine at the end of the show, but more to do with them being annoyed with how rushed her turn is and how it seems to exist solely to make Dany a pitch-black antagonist that needs to be stopped.

I think most people would have been satisfied with the turn if Dany started burning the city indiscriminately when it became apparent that Cersei's men weren't going to surrender no matter what, which would have made her decision slightly more ambigoius if still on the dark side. Then again, that still wouldn't explain why Dany and Drogon couldn't just burn and/or tear apart the Red Keep to get the Cersei to avoid destroying the rest of King's Landing, but hey, that's been an issue since Season 7 so why bring it up now, right. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fumarole wrote:
This video has some great points, the main one being that many people are confusing what doesn't work for what they didn't want.

This is blaming fans for not liking something. How about the show produces a better season, and then fans will like it?

If the majority of the fan base dislikes something... that means the thing didn't appeal to the fan base. This isn't rocket science.

The video takes some comments from twitter to build straw-men to knock down. This isn't going to force people to like the season. People don't like the season. The appropriate response isn't "Sheesh, those fans are dumb." The appropriate response is "Huh, lets analyze the story to see if we can figure out why it didn't appeal to people."


Kit Harington with a comment for critics of the show.

This is more of the same. His argument essentially comes down to...

We worked really hard on the show, therefore we deserve to have you love it.

That's not how entertainment works, Kit. You're supposed to work hard. He got paid $500k per episode, or $3 mil for this season. There are a lot of people in this world who work a lot f~##ing harder than he does for a lot less money. If he wants our love as well, he should be on a better show.


Dany did what practically every leftist revolutionary has done when/if they get power going at least as far back as the French Revolution.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Yes, because no conservative person has gotten power and killed people.

I think the theme of Dany having absolute power, and her abuse of it, has nothing to do with left/right politics, but just the theme of absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Dark Archive

Delightful wrote:
I can't speak for anyone else but I think most peoples problem with Dany's turn isn't necessary because they wanted her to be a conventional heroine at the end of the show, but more to do with them being annoyed with how rushed her turn is and how it seems to exist solely to make Dany a pitch-black antagonist that needs to be stopped.

I feel like, in the shortened season, it felt like the writers felt the need to write everything in bold, and eliminate any ambiguity that might remain (as if they were writing Dany's action as over-the-top to address any fan outcry in advance, and kind of missed the point, IMO).

If those green explosions during Drogon's rampage had been touched on after the fact, for instance, and served as a suggestion that Cersei would have torched the city *anyway* rather than surrender it, Dany's rampage could have seemed somewhat less cut and dried (in that they were all going to die burning anyway).

But no. Instead it's just, 'Oh, she was always mental. This totally is your fault for not expecting it. Blah, blah, wanted a happy ending, weren't paying attention. Take that!'

Not a classy reply, in any event. If it was intended to be a shocking end-cap to the series, and one to be talked about, then be less defensive and own it. *Brag* about how you made her complicated, and capable of sympathetic and even laudable goals about 'breaking the wheel' and all that, and yet also a terribly flawed vessel to bring about that change, because of her family instability, her personal upbringing, and her mental connection to Drogon (who sees a world full of tiny tasty flammable things far below him, where we see fellow human beings) which, through dreams, and later, even daydreams, slowly colored her moods, as their 'link' went both ways...


Irontruth wrote:

Yes, because no conservative person has gotten power and killed people.

I think the theme of Dany having absolute power, and her abuse of it, has nothing to do with left/right politics, but just the theme of absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Right-wing murderous tyrants behave differently when they get power and kill people (not so much on the never-ending revolution thing).


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't want this to devolve into a miserable political debate, but Dany is absolutist monarch whose claim to power derives from her bloodline. That's as far away from leftist sentiment as one can get, in my opinion.

Furthermore, the only thing about her that can arguably pass as leftist is her consistent anti-slavery actions and rhetoric, which SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A LEFTIST ONLY POSITION. That is a decent human being position that shouldn't exclusive fit any one side of the political axis. Liberals and conservatives should both equally despise slavery as vile institution. Oh my God.


As for Dany long ago showing signs of being The Mad Queen, I must say that she was pretty much doomed due to 3 canon and one speculative reason,

1.Tainted Targ blood
2.A life where her head was filled with propaganda bout how it was her destiny to rule
3.Abusive life at the hands of her brother/Drogo before he became her tru wuv

4(Speculative) Mind/Time manipulation by Lich-King Bran whispering to her through the grass.

1-3 could be overcome via methods that just didn't exist in Westeros(Mental health care,medicine) while 4 was the final nail on her coffin.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Delightful wrote:
Fumarole wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:
There were clues about Dany being not such a good person all along, but they were somewhat ambiguous until Dany actually burned King's Landing.

Somewhat ambiguous? She threatened to burn Qarth to the ground way back in season two when she was denied entry. The only reason she didn't was that her dragons were far too small at the time. People who didn't realize she had this dark side to her all along only saw what they wanted to see because her advisors had been keeping her in check all this time. You know, those advisors who by episode 805 were all dead or who had failed/betrayed her.

This video has some great points, the main one being that many people are confusing what doesn't work for what they didn't want.

I think there's a difference between threatening to burn a city because your people will starve to death in the desert if they don't get in, to burning a city even after its already surrendered to you. The former is a very morally ambiguous decision born from sympathetic desperation that the audience can somewhat relate to, while the other is blatantly Stupid Evil act made by a crazy person.

Of course there is a difference, anyone who thinks otherwise is being daft. I was responding to the claim that her being "not such a good person" was ambiguous. She flat out told us in season two that she is willing to burn a city to the ground, including the civilian population, if she doesn't get her way. She wouldn't burn Qarth immediately, no, she promised to come back when her dragons were grown, and this would mean that enough time has passed such that she was no longer desperate to remain alive, but prosperous and vengeful. The civilians in Qarth didn't deny her entry, it was just the ruling council of Thirteen. But she threatened to burn the entire city to the ground. That is just about as far from ambiguity as one can get, other than actually doing it, which of course got in the penultimate episode.

Fire and blood.


KahnyaGnorc wrote:
Irontruth wrote:

Yes, because no conservative person has gotten power and killed people.

I think the theme of Dany having absolute power, and her abuse of it, has nothing to do with left/right politics, but just the theme of absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Right-wing murderous tyrants behave differently when they get power and kill people (not so much on the never-ending revolution thing).

Was she advocating for never-ending revolution?

I don't think she was. Point in fact, when someone tried to rebel against her, she quashed it pretty hard.

Stop trying to bring your politics into this.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

In regard to Dany's morality being ambiguous -- In season 7, Dany made major sacrifices for the greater good that actually got in the way of her ultimate goal of becoming queen of Westeros. On the other hand, her burning of Randall Tarly and his son when he could not yet honorably swear fealty to her should have been more of a warning of her evil potential to the Westerosi nobles (if not to the audience, who had already seen that, while he was not an evil bastard as her previous victims were, he was definitely a jerk).

She might also have done better if somebody had had the courage to give her a full rundown of the realities of the Westerosi political situation. She was able to handle her conquest of Slaver's Bay far better than that of Westeros because she had no delusions or preconceptions about the situation in Slaver's Bay.


David knott 242 wrote:

In regard to Dany's morality being ambiguous -- In season 7, Dany made major sacrifices for the greater good that actually got in the way of her ultimate goal of becoming queen of Westeros. On the other hand, her burning of Randall Tarly and his son when he could not yet honorably swear fealty to her should have been more of a warning of her evil potential to the Westerosi nobles (if not to the audience, who had already seen that, while he was not an evil bastard as her previous victims were, he was definitely a jerk).

She might also have done better if somebody had had the courage to give her a full rundown of the realities of the Westerosi political situation. She was able to handle her conquest of Slaver's Bay far better than that of Westeros because she had no delusions or preconceptions about the situation in Slaver's Bay.

There was Olenna but she didn't have enough time to speak much with Dany before telling Jaime she killed Cercei's little crotch dropping


I kinda expected from the books for Dany to turn evil, or at least morally neutral, as Martin rarely writes pure good or evil characters (except Euron and Ramsay in later books), but the show simplified her and it seemed she'd turn out good then they had to do their ''subverted expectations''.

This is a minor problem, and the battle was way one-sided, but what about all other ruined characters, it's much worse with them, it started with Stannis, then Dorne, Arya's training was pathetic, Varys, Littlefinger, and Tyrion lost their intelligence which imo was the most interesting part of the show/books, Bran became boring which is quite an achievement for the most magical person in the world, Euron became a joke of a villain, not as intimidating as in the books, except when he had ballistae that could sink the Yamato. Jaime, in the end what's the point of him, what's the point of the Iron Bank, they've build up the Night King threat who doesn't even exist in the books, what for, etc. in the end most things don't make sense, the Dothraki and Unsullied resurrect themselves and King's Landing repairs itself when it's convenient. I liked the Clegane fight, and the build up to the battle of Winterfell, that's it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The themes of Jaime's story aren't bad. It was basically a story of addiction. The problem is that it was poorly executed. He went through all these things that should have given him a chance to redeem himself, but like an addict who succumbs to addiction, he failed. That's fine.

The problem is that he was doing fine. He was doing fine. He was doing fine. Then without warning he dropped off a cliff. A defense could be made that this is "realistic", but just because something is realistic doesn't mean it's a good story.

Grass growing is realistic. I'm not watching 8 seasons of grassing growing though.

The defense someone will probably give is that with the shortened season, they just didn't have time to develop it properly. I will remind you that we wasted time:
-having multiple arguments over who was going to the crypts. MULTIPLE.
-jokes about what it's like to have sex with tall women.
-Pod arranging a threesome
-Many, many conversations about how Sansa doesn't like Dany (like at least 4-5 in the first 2 episodes, another 2-3 in EP4)
-Bronn's assassination plot (it really added nothing to the story, it didn't change how a single character felt about anyone)

Cut all that out and we easily have 20-30 minutes of running time to put in other useful story stuff that would have dramatically enhanced the show. It would have allowed for any single failed story line to suddenly have lots of time to develop and be really cool, OR could split that up to improve multiple story lines moderately each.

It also occurred to me, the EP4 naval scene was pretty pointless. The exact same things (excluding Grey Worm's personal hatred) could have been achieved by folding that dragon's death into EP5. Dany rides triumphantly into the battle, and one of her dragons gets killed. Now all of a sudden her in the moment cruelty makes more sense, heightens the tension within that battle and makes both episodes better.

Also, they should have folded Varys poisoning attempt into EP 6 more. Let Tyrion learn of it, and he tries to persuade Jon that if he isn't comfortable with killing her with a sword, he can find some poison in Varys' personal effects (he can comment that he found a note on how to do it). Jon can be disgusted with it, but then later he realizes that her death is still necessary, and it ups the ante on his choice to do it in a more personal way (face to face, with the dagger).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Set wrote:
Delightful wrote:
I can't speak for anyone else but I think most peoples problem with Dany's turn isn't necessary because they wanted her to be a conventional heroine at the end of the show, but more to do with them being annoyed with how rushed her turn is and how it seems to exist solely to make Dany a pitch-black antagonist that needs to be stopped.

I feel like, in the shortened season, it felt like the writers felt the need to write everything in bold, and eliminate any ambiguity that might remain (as if they were writing Dany's action as over-the-top to address any fan outcry in advance, and kind of missed the point, IMO).

lack of subtlety has been a hallmark of the show for a very very long time, well before the last two seasons.


No doubt people are going to be rather freaked out by the fact that Bran can spy on their sexy fun times. 'King Bran is watching you sexxor'


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Phillip Gastone wrote:
No doubt people are going to be rather freaked out by the fact that Bran can spy on their sexy fun times. 'King Bran is watching you sexxor'

Also, he can warg into either partner. Maybe into both.

Maybe his white-eye moments are just him surfing for weirwood porn.


Here's how to know if the end of the series was good or not:

Did something happen that surprised you AND you felt was exactly what you needed to see?

For example, everyone expected Cleganebowl. It wasn't surprising, so even if you felt like you needed to see it, doesn't count.

Example two, Bran is made king. If you're surprised, and felt ambiguous about it... it doesn't count as a good ending. (No offense, if you have to create entire fan theories of things not supported in the actual show, IMO that sounds like reach and hence... ambiguous)

Lest you think that I'm cynical and think this kind of thing can't exist: Avengers spoiler:

Spoiler:
I did not expect Captain America to wield Mjolnir. For one, I thought it was destroyed. In the back of my mind I knew it was a possibility, but I wasn't expecting to see it AND it was a cathartic release for me. I really, really loved it.

The comparison is fairly valid IMO too. The MCU and GoT started about the same time, both have held a central place in pop culture for a while, and while the MCU will continue, it essentially ended a whole set of story lines with Endgame. Endgame is how you do that pretty well, GoT is how you do it wrong.

I don't think anything happened in the last episode meets these criteria. In the entire season, the only moment that fulfills it is the knighting of Brienne, but honestly that is a pretty minor thing. I like the character, and glad she got knighted, but all the benefits of that scene get tossed out the window when the show treats her like a crying housewife two episodes later.

Nothing about the last season was really surprising, nor did any of it even feel necessary.

With that, I will cease my b%#%@ing.

Anyone want to start a pool on which actors will get recast into new roles in the new series that will be made in 20 years after the books are done?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Phillip Gastone wrote:
No doubt people are going to be rather freaked out by the fact that Bran can spy on their sexy fun times. 'King Bran is watching you sexxor'

Then again, he seems to have lost enough of his humanity that he doesn't care. He would probably just register that these two people are not elsewhere doing anything of interest to him and move on.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

It’s about the same as your pet being in the same room.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
It’s about the same as your pet being in the same room.

I think Bran would try to interfere less.

3,001 to 3,036 of 3,036 << first < prev | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Entertainment / Television / Sean Bean heads cast for HBO's A Game of Thrones All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Television