You obviously know that Bronn is a skilled sellsword and not some random dude in a tavern. You know that his agility , experience , and the fact he tires out Vardis by making him work is the reason he won that fight. You also know that Vardis was not using his own sword.

Knowing these things , even if all that info was not presented on screen , feigning ignorance of these and stating an opinion in the other thread , seems like playing "devil's advocate" to me.

And what is the point of it all anyway ? If I'm disappointed with a portrayal I realize that some of it stems from the fact that I have prior knowledge and my own opinion of how things should be portrayed . I discuss it here with people who also have that knowledge. Doing it in the other thread serves no purpose imo.

From what has been shown in the show, no I don't.

Please show me what suggests he did use his own sword. As to the other part:
You can go back to my other post on the subject and read about this there too if you like.

If you'd read what I'd wrote you'd realize I don't mind if it's different. I just think that was an exceptionally poor portrayal. Many things have been portrayed differently, and I've liked them for the most part, I did not like this one. I have given lots of reasons why.

If you don't want to treat the two as different mediums, that is fine, doesn't mean I have to also.

Most of your questions seem to have already been answered by me. Please refer to my other posts on the subject.

given all of this, it seems like this is really more of a personal thing you have against me, and not actually on my take on the story. So if you'd like to continue this, feel free to pm me.

The hunt was lame just like the joust was lame- not enough extras. Oh well. The one on one scenes are great, and Dinklage is also great.

LF must think Ned is a moron- I didn't think he was that much of a moron, just blinded by honor, but the show makes him much mormoronic.

I give up.

Well FWIW at that point in the books I didn't know either, which is why it is very clearly explained why Bronn is able to defeat Vardis.


I didn't think that the tourney suffered from not enough extras. the main problem was just that there weren't enough tilts. I thought that the costume design and extras looked really good in that scene.

I do think its a great scene, some really great dialogue, all but the last line which I thought was corny, but that's just my inner nit most likely.

That scene from the books should have dispelled most of the "Jaime should have owned Ned in the swordfight" comments I've seen.

Ned didn't survive that encounter by having average sword skills.

I really hope Howland Reed makes an appearance somewhere down the line.

Well that was several years prior. It's also very unlikely that Howland is a very good fighter compared to that company.

I really hope he makes an appearance too, seems like such a cool character.

General question since I assume people ITT have read the books...

How good are the books? Is it worth reading them before starting the show?

books are great. If I were you I'd just start reading them and watching the show at the same time. You'll probably finish watching the series before finishing the books and can decide if you want to read the other 4 books after.

Uh, the fact that we have all read them and have a large thread devoted to discussing them and the show would probably indicate that the books are pretty good.

As for whether to read first or watch first - it's really up to you. I'd go with whatever is more convenient, but definitely do both.

Also you should get out of this thread if you don't want everything to be spoiled.

Hmmmmmmmmm.........yeah I disagree. No desire to see people pretend joust. Too many good scenes to cram into 57 minutes to worry about jousting.

We never even saw the hound joust, despite him actually winning the entire tournament in the end.

I bet a bunch of people don't even realize that the Hound was declared the winner.

Such a cool scene.

What I don't understand is what they are doing. The prevailing theory seems to be that Rhaegar ordered them there because he wanted them to protect Lyanna. Why then did they not let her brother in. Was it just out of revenge for the rebellion? Did Rhaegar order them not to let Lyanna go? Very confusing.
I need ADwD!

Given the whole conversation up to this point is about how the KG doesn't flee and doesn't surrender this line would make the most sense that their duty to protect the heir is beginning.

I think the theory is that they are there to protect Lyanna & Rhaegar's child. They wouldn't be protecting anyone who didn't have royal blood.

No, you win. I was about to posit that BGP's point here is just like claiming that Ser Vardis Egen wasn't wearing his own underwear, on the argument that there's nothing in the show to demonstrate that his undergarments were in fact his own.

As I lectured to Dids earlier in the thread, the books are ridiculously good. Stop whatever you are doing RIGHT NOW and start reading them. If you're anything like most of the rest of us, you won't be able do achieve anything else at all until you're done with the fourth book.

Of course, but why should they have to protect Lyanna and her baby from her brother? Why should honorable Ned harm her?

Following their orders makes them fail in their purpose and commit suicide by Ned. Has a kind of Samurai ring to it. "Protecting them" doesn't really make sense.

I hadn't really thought about that before.

Knowing that Rhaegar is dead you'd think that they'd be under Lyanna's command to.

My "I've read some of the book" POV is that given how stereotypical Martin went with Renly- having him be obviously gay early on makes his character make a lot more sense than just having him be sorta silly in the wrong spots. It's a pretty dumb character so far, but if he's going to flounce, I like it better with a (kinda trite/dumb) reason.

maybe they were more worried about wat robert would do to a targaryen heir, cause we know how robert feels about them. in fact ned would have to keep the baby hidden from robert permanently and make sure nobody else knows about the childs parentage. making up a story to protect the child would probably be for the best.

Yea this.

IMO I think they were protecting the legitimate heir to the throne. It was not uncommon for Targaryen’s to take multiple wives. I think Lyanna and Rhaegar got married when they ran off. I mean he basically started a war for this woman why not marry her? Now what kind of impact this could have in the story or if there is anyone else who could confirm it (Howland Reed?) I don’t know. But I don’t think that Jon Snow is a bastard after all.

Jon doesn't necessarily need to be legitimate. It is certainly possible, although this depends on whether people are willing to accept Jon as legitimate. As far as any role Jon plays in prophesies, I doubt they care as to his legitimacy.

While it makes sense for the KG to be protecting the legitimate heir its just as likely that Rhaegar ordered them to protect Lyanna and the unborn child. While we might view letting Ned see his sister as the "right" thing, this is not the honorable thing, which I feel is partly the reason for the dialog that takes place prior to the fight.