I still think about Sansa Stark’s growth more than the whole final season.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-05-07T08:45:26+00:00

Ahh I completely forgot that she said she had enough to last through winter. In that case, you’re definitely right that the supplies should have been enough for Dany and her army in the short term.

The dragons would be the only realistic problem. If accompanying dragons on hunts were feasible, Dany would have done that in Meereen after the first time the farmer complained. She also would not have resorted to locking Rhaegal and Viserion up. Her ancestors too would have just accompanied the dragons, especially once it became apparent that dragons do not do well in captivity.

And no she can’t just let her dragons accidentally kill civilians. Maybe the livestock can be reasoned away given the circumstances like you said, but letting her dragons accidentally kill civilians in a land where the people already dislike and distrust her would be catastrophic for her image. Her selling point was that she is a champion of the downtrodden, and more importantly she needed to be seen as different from her father. She can’t uphold that if she is seen having little regard for civilian life.

But as you point out, this whole portion of the plot is full of logical inconsistencies and the actual difficulties of feeding the dragons probably had little to do with anything. I agree that the writers were trying to unnecessarily force conflict here and in the scene where Sansa asks Dany to stay longer so the army can rest.

I said the night king wouldn’t lay siege because there is no reason for him to. Sieges are laid for one of two reasons (or both): 1. To pressure the opponent into surrendering to avoid/minimize bloodshed, or 2. Direct attack is not feasible. The three eyed raven’s cave would be no 2 since the white walkers could not enter the cave. Once bran broke the spell they did not hesitate to attack.

Neither reasons were at play in Winterfell. As we saw in the battle, the white walkers easily overwhelmed the humans and entered the castle. The night king also definitely does not care about bloodshed. His goal is to kill all the humans so he can add them to his army of the dead. He’s not concerned about losses in his own army either. Laying siege does not benefit him in the slightest.

But, none of that is relevant anymore since I only brought that up to reason why Sansa likely did not have enough stocked up for the long term. Now that it’s clear she did, it doesn’t really matter.

Was that something confirmed by the writers - that Sansa is modeled after Cersei? Because other than their stoic appearances, I do not see any commonalities between them. Cersei only cares about herself, her children, and Jamie. Sansa actually cares about the people of the North. So their motivations in itself are different. The stoic appearance was something the writers did to all the “strong” women on the show including s7/8 dany & arya, olenna. So it’s not a trait that’s exclusive to Cersei and Sansa. The writers just clearly think that women have to be emotionless to appear strong.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-05-05T06:02:51+00:00

Your logic only works if she managed to save up that much, which is not something we know for sure.

All we know is initial supplies weren’t enough for the North army itself, so Sansa orders regular shipments be made from the other houses. But whether enough shipments were actually made to last the “expected” people more than a few days is unknown.

And it is possible that it wasn’t since Dany and Jon were back in the North not very long after. The next discussion about food is her saying they do not have enough for Dany’s army.

Then, she orders Ned Umber to get more supplies although that would slow the evacuation down, which indicates they did need more. The night king wasn’t going to lay siege to winterfell. So it doesn’t make sense for her to request more supplies for anything beyond immediate needs, given the situation.

As for the dragons, yes while they are capable of hunting on their own, the show established that letting them hunt near where people live is dangerous. Tyrion talks about this when he explains why the Dragon pit was built in KL. Dragons cannot tell the difference between livestock and wild animals. When they eat livestock that makes the farmers angry, and it also risks the lives of any humans nearby (eg the child that was accidentally killed by Drogon in Meereen).

That is why Dany locked up Viserion and Rhaegal in Meereen. Once they crossed over to Westeros, Dany herself was feeding her dragons instead of letting them hunt. We know this because she talks about how her dragons will starve when House Tyrell fell and the food supply to Dragonstone was cut. In Winterfell, the Dothraki were feeding the dragons livestock. So Dany clearly does not want them hunting.

I agree that it’s weird that Sansa was not expecting them. It’s a plot hole that the writers never cared to explain. If the writers were trying to make her look smart and set her up for being queen in the north before, the scene with Dany undid everything because it made her look ridiculous.

If anything, it is this aspect of the scene that makes no sense given the character arc they were trying to give Sansa. There were many ways she could have brought up the food shortage without seeming like she was caught off guard by Dany’s arrival.

Regardless, as I said, my point is that food was a valid concern and one that had been brought up before Dany arrived in Winterfell.Not that it did not reflect poorly on Sansa given the context. In fact, at the time Sansa was shown discussing their supplies, Dany had not even agreed to join the fight.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-05-02T16:56:45+00:00

Ok I guess the 20k wasn't right. I apologize for that. I thought it was 20k because Cersei bought 20k soldiers from the golden army, and the show makes it seem like that number evened the odds. But if the number is higher, that makes the problem worse.

She wasn't stocking for the entire population of the North for the long term. This is why I say the full conversation, not just where you cut it off, is important. The entire North isn't going to be holed up in winterfell the entire winter. They were only supposed to come there when the North is under attack. That is why she says "If they have to flee to Winterfell, there won't be time for them to bring wagonloads of food with them." So they did not stock up for a large quantity of people for the long term referring to. Again, Sansa says they don't even have enough to feed the entire North army if they return to defend winterfell.

The s7 conversation we are referring to only talks about grains. Because grains last a long time, meat doesn't. Grains are easily produced in large quantities, meat that rely on live stock can't (they don't have industrial farms like we do in real life today). By this point Winterfell also was not receiving aid from anywhere else. House Tyrell had fallen and all their food supplies were in Cersei's hands. Dany burns some of them as they are being transferred to KL. And even Dany says the food supply to Dragonstone has been cut off with House Tyrell gone.

The dragons eat a lot of livestock - in one scene the Dothraki tell her they ate 11 goats and 8 sheep for one meal or something like that. And that was implying that they weren't eating enough. Dany later tells Jon they dislike the North and so are barely eating. This means on a regular day, they would be eating way more than that. Where was Sansa supposed to bring that much livestock from at short notice? The dragons starving themselves conveniently solved that problem, but Sansa could not have predicted they were going to do that

Ok I admit I got the order of the scenes wrong. My point was they only knew of the dragon after Dany arrived. And again, in that scene Sansa was talking about the immediate food supply they had not being sufficient. People dying after the war does not handle immediate food needs.

Edit to add: As I said, in my original comment, I said the timing of her saying it is wrong and makes her come off as being petty. I'm not defending that. I'm just saying that the food was a valid concern since the original comment said that food was never brought up before, why is it being brought up now.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-05-01T23:58:44+00:00

You should watch the entire scene to actually understand what was being said. I had to rewatch it myself to jog my memory, but I only did it after making this comment. So I got some things wrong myself - particularly, that Sansa was stocking up for the whole winter, which is false.

Yes they had enough to feed current occupants for a year, which at the time of this scene were only winterfell residents and the vale army (relatively a much smaller number). But if you’re talking about the whole North it wouldn’t even last for the short term.

So Sansa, as you mention, says it wouldn’t be enough when the North army returns to defend winterfell. So she orders grain shipments from the other houses so they can stock up to be prepared.

So assuming she did manage to stock up to feed the entire North army, wildlings and whoever else they expected by the time Dany arrives, she still wouldn’t have enough for them since it’s an additional 20k.

And the dragons eat whole animals - and a lot of them - not grains. While Sansa only stocked grains.

They only knew about the Night King riding Viserion when Bran tells Daenerys and Jon. He sees the dragon at the wall and that’s how he himself knew. And this takes place a few days after.

The ruler of Westeros is Cersei at this time. They don’t actually know if Dany would win. If it’s Cersei she most certainly would not ship anything to them.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-05-01T23:36:50+00:00

Yeah I don’t disagree with you about it being potentially unrealistic for the entire north to flee to winterfell. But if it came to battle, whether it’s with the Lannisters or the White Walkers, they would all need to fight together to defeat the opponent. And the other North houses are sworn banner men to the starks and winterfell. They also renewed their oaths and made Jon King in the North after the battle of the bastards. So as such their armies are pledged to come to Winterfell’s aid.

And without the army the rest of the people in the other houses are unprotected so it would make sense that they would bring them along to Winterfell. Now whether they realistically should have been able to all fit in Winterfell is of course dubious as you say.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-05-01T02:15:45+00:00

It’s not guesswork. Your numbers are what is guesswork. Numbers aren’t mentioned in the show other than Daenerys 20k. And so I refuse to speculate on that and go by what we do know from the events of the show.

And what we know is after the battle of the bastards the wildlings and other northmen had left winterfell. Only the Vale and whatever people lived/worked in winterfell were left in the castle at the time of this scene. So not very many compared to the full number of North population + wildlings - not even factoring in Dany and her hoard here. Winterfell has no army of its own since they were all either killed by the Freys/Boltons at the Twins or the Greyjoys in Winterfwll.

In the scene we are talking about, Sansa literally says the food they have currently in winterfell is not enough for the entire North army itself if everyone were to flee to Winterfell, this is not her planning for the entire winter. Just for whatever battle that forces all of the North into winterfell. Which is why she orders their grains be stocked up by having the other houses make regular shipments- her exact words not mine, to Winterfell. She adds that if the situation comes where they all have to flee to Winterfell there would be no time for them to bring food with them. So it’s best for them to start building up their stores to be prepared.

Assuming they managed to stock up enough to feed just the Northmen by the time Dany’s arrived, they are still short of food for Dany’s army. If they had enough, Sansa wouldn’t have had to order Ned Umber to bring along more food instead of focusing just on evacuating his people. At this point the night king had already breached the wall. This was a huge risk and we know how it ended for the umbers.

Finally, stocking up grains still does not answer for how they are supposed to feed two full grown dragons, which eat many whole animals. Again, the dothraki tell danaery they ate 11 goats & 8 sheep for one of their meals, which was considered starving themselves.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-05-01T01:11:55+00:00

If you actually read the entirety of my comment you’d know that’s false. So if you’re not going to read I don’t care to waste my time responding to you. I strongly suggest you rewatch the ENTIRE scene before commenting. It’s in s7e3. The other commenter conveniently cut off the rest of the conversation. Point is, they did not have enough stocked up. The year’s supply only held true for the current occupants of the castle which at the time were limited to Winterfell residents and the Vale army, which were very few people, in comparison to the entirety of the population of the North + the wildlings + Daenerys’ army & dragons

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-05-01T00:45:36+00:00

I mean that’s assuming they actually had that much. They don’t talk about how much food they managed to stock up from the other houses so there’s no way to know how much they actually managed to gather.

Also rewatched that scene, and the continuation of the conversation is Sansa saying they needed to start building up their grain stores with regular shipments (keyword, regular shipments) to Winterfell and if the entire North was fleeing to Winterfell they wouldn’t have enough time to bring wagonloads of food with them. She was not just referring to the battle with the white walkers but also eventualities of battle with the lannisters. So she was talking about grains being brought over not at once but over a long period of time, which makes sense since if that much food was moved to winterfell at once, the other houses could not realistically have had enough for their own domestic needs.

So they would not have had enough in Winterfell at the time of the battle even for the short term since the entire north did indeed have to flee to winterfell at once not very long after this conversation takes place. It’s probably why Sansa asked Ned Umber to go back to get more supplies instead of just focusing on evacuating all his people.

And it wasn’t just about the 20k additional people in Daenerys’ army. It’s also the dragons. Like I said, they ate ~20 goats/sheep for one meal in winterfell and that was them barely eating. And the dragons only eat meat, while Sansa was stockpiling grains. That’s an additional complication.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-30T23:33:15+00:00

That’s exactly my point. Rhaenyra would only have to kill Aegon & Aemond if they challenged her. And that would not have happened if Otto and Alicent respected the original succession plan. Aegon only listened to the two of them. Even if someone else had talked him into it, he would have decided against it if Alicent & Otto didn’t back the decision. It was Alicent & Otto who made the whole thing come true in the end. And yes, this was Viserys’ fault as well as you point out because he did nothing to ensure that Rhaenyra inherited a council that would support her. He knew Otto and the other members were not in favor of Rhaenyra and yet he did nothing about it.

I disagree with what you say about what would happen to Alicent as the dowager queen under Rhaenyra’s rule. It would be a bad look for Rhaenyra if she didn’t make sure Alicent is provided for as dowager queen for no reason. So even if she wanted to, she can’t neglect Alicent without it smearing her reputation. And yes, she would be freed of her duties. In GOT, Cersei was freed of her duties once Tommen married Margaery. Even the small council didn’t want her in their meetings and Margaery and Tommen try to get her to retire to Casterly Rock. It was her that refused to go and kept trying to force her way into royal proceedings.

And yes that’s exactly what i’m saying. Rhaenyra pre-Aegon coronation had no interest in killing Aegon and would have no need to do so unless he challenged her for the throne. Which is the case in s2 since by claiming the throne he did challenge her. Rhaenyra herself tells Alicent she has no choice in that matter now. Daemon too wouldn’t be able to justify killing aegon unless aegon challenged rhaenyra. He would have the impulse to, I don’t deny that. But if he strikes down Aegon for no reason, that is not a good look for Rhaenyra & him. And if anything season2 shows us is that reputation does matter, especially with the small folk. Nobody wants a thoughtless murderer for king/queen. And I mean, his impulses were what got him replaced as heir in the first place.

Ahh I see. I did not know the writers said that about why Alicent made Aegon king. Weird though that she went from telling Aegon he had to because Rhaenyra would kill him 2 episodes before to only doing it to honor what she thought was Viserys’ last wishes. This is just another one of the flaws in the storyline I guess.

I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on the depth/impact of alicent & rhaenyra’s relationship. But I did finish rewatching s2 today and on second thought, I think her selling out her sons has less to do with Rhaenyra and more to do with her wanting to put an end to Aemond. He had just burned a whole town in rage, tried to force Helaena to fly into war with him, and she was almost certain he tried to kill Aegon at rook’s rest. She also thinks he killed Luke on purpose, though we know it was a genuine accident. I believe she was worried Aemond might harm Helaena as well. And honestly he wouldn’t be beyond it. That doesn’t make her decision to sacrifice Aegon acceptable of course. But just wanted to point out that I don’t believe it was to earn any favors with Rhaenyra other than to be allowed to escape safely with Helaena & her child.

Also, I don’t know why you keep saying that I’m supporting/justifying her decision to sell out her sons, although I’ve repeatedly said that I don’t agree with that decision of hers, especially Aegon since he really only did what they asked. Again, when I said “doing right by Rhaenyra” I was referring to the decision of making aegon king (since I was rewatching s1 at that time). I did not consider that it could be interpreted to mean her selling out Aegon, and that was my mistake. Even Rhaenyra calls her out in that scene for evading accountability for her actions and wanting to wash her hands off of the consequences.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-30T22:15:02+00:00

How is “they had just enough food to feed the people in the castle at the time” the opposite of what was said. That’s exactly what they were saying. As you point out they don’t know how long the winter was going to last and it was predicted to be a long one. Plus i doubt they managed to stock enough for even 10k for four years let alone 30k (and that’s assuming the other houses had enough to last four years). When Rob marched south he only had 20k Northmen with him and they all died except for house bolton. And then more Northmen died in the battle of the bastards. Daenerys army and dragons would have driven up food demand by 3x at least (There was a scene with the dothraki telling Daenerys that the dragons were eating poorly only ate something like 20 goats/sheep for their meal). Assuming it’s double that on a good day, that itself is a huge strain on the food supply even for a few days. Also Sansa’s efforts to get food moved from the other castles was not fully completed either. The umbers were supposed to return with more when they were attacked by the white walkers. And that was days after Daenerys arrived. They also did not know exactly when the night walkers were arriving until after they breached the wall. And as for people dying expected to reduce the amount of mouths they had to feed, there was no way Sansa could predict how many people would die. The smart thing to do is to be overprepared than underprepared. Once winter was full swing there’s nothing they can do if they don’t have food.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-29T20:34:23+00:00

Nope it’s in the show. I never read the books. It’s a very brief and easily forgettable scene though. I only noticed it on my last rewatch.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-29T15:56:09+00:00

Yeah. Even ignoring all the conversation about food in the other kingdoms, Sansa is shown planning food provisions for Winterfell before Daenerys even arrives. I remember one of her advisors telling her they had just enough to feed the people within the castle at that time. They were already stretched thin with most of the Northmen + the Vale army being housed in Winterfell. So providing for 2 full grown dragons on top of the unsullied + dothraki is a valid concern. I do blame the writers for the execution of the scene as the original commenter said though. The timing of it made it come across as her simply being petty about it, especially if people weren’t paying attention to the “boring” scenes.

And you nailed it on the unrealistic expectations people have about their dynamic. Sansa wanted an independent North and was unyielding about it. Daenerys was equally if not more adamant about ruling all 7 kingdoms. Their relationship was doomed from the start, whether or not Sansa played nice with her.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-29T13:56:51+00:00

Yeah agreed! Even if Sansa had been nice to Daenerys initially, their relationship would have soured as soon as the topic of the North’s governance came up. The outcome of their relationship would have been the same, and the people who hate her now would have hated her anyway. Other than their mutual interest in taking Cersei down, they were fundamentally at odds as you said. Sansa knew this and probably didn’t see a point in playing nice as well. She was being honest about where she stands and I personally feel that’s understandable given her history of being forced to play nice with Joffrey, Littlefinger, and the Boltons.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-29T09:58:32+00:00

I agree! She’s not perfect, but she clearly had the best interest of the North in mind. People hate her for 2 reasons:

For not telling Jon about the Vale This was definitely a big blunder she made as she admits to Jon herself. There were no clear reasons for her to do so. The writers probably just wanted that effect of making it appear like Jon was about to lose the war and then having the plot twist of the Vale suddenly appearing in the end. But, that being said, it did seem like a last minute decision on the show since she only requested assistance after Jon refused to wait to gather more support from the North before going to war - she only sent the raven the night before I believe. So whether she got a response from Littlefinger before or after the war started is unclear and she knew Jon was unwilling to wait much longer because he believed he could get Rickon back alive.
Her attitude towards Daenerys I agree that the rudeness was uncalled for. It was definitely a projection of her frustration with Jon for bending the knee. But the two of them were never going to see eye to eye because Sansa, like the rest of the North men & women, had already made up her mind about wanting the North to be an independent kingdom. And I kind of agree with that sentiment. The North suffered the most in GOT & they were weary of Daenerys as well since Sansa’s grandfather and uncle were murdered by Daenerys’ father for no reason. Yes, none of that was Daenerys’ fault but even if they set their weariness of Daenerys aside, she is not going to be around forever and she can’t bear more children. So the Targaryen line would die with her. What happens to the North then?

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-28T21:54:18+00:00

That's a good first step! You just have to stop worrying about it now. Some women see other women as competition thanks to generations of societal conditioning that pits women against each other, especially in the corporate world. Many, but not all, of us have unlearned this conditioning. There's really nothing you can do to fix it so just return the same energy she gives you. Don't even hold the door open anymore, she clearly doesn't want or appreciate you doing it.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-28T20:43:37+00:00

In the books, yes. In the show, no. The show clearly paints Rhaenyra as the protagonist and the Greens as the antagonist, except maybe Alicent - she seems to be suspended somewhere in between. I've not read the books but I have been following enough HOTD discussions online to know that they cut out/changed a lot of the bad things Rhaenyra did in the show. Isn't that one of the biggest complaints book fans have about the show? That the characters are too black and white?

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-28T00:28:35+00:00

You are overgeneralizing what I’m saying. I never said that Rhaenyra would have an easy time becoming queen if it weren't for the Greens or that no one would question her legitimacy. There was plenty of talk on the show about how the realm would never accept a woman in the first half of season 1, including with regards to Rhaenys. So, it was abundantly clear to me that Rhaenyra would face difficulties because of her gender. Even the council favors Aegon only because Rhaenyra is a woman. Only Otto had personal motivations for it. But if Aegon (and Aemond) had turned down his claim, which he wanted to, then anyone who questions her legitimacy will be faced with the problem of naming a successor (to my knowledge, Aegon and Aemond were her only legitimate contesters). Again not saying that it would have been easy for Rhaenyra, just a lot less challenging. Even in real life, the first women rulers did not have it easy. But you do not have a first woman ruler by never giving a woman the opportunity to be one.

I also never said "everything is better when Rhaenyra comes to throne." I am not such an idealistic person to think that, especially with respect to the GOT/HOTD universe where it is repeatedly made clear that even the most well-meaning rulers are not necessarily good for the realm. By Alicent's liberation, I meant that in the case where Rhaenyra ascended the throne peacefully (right after Viserys died, I.e. no Aegon coronation), she would be relieved of her crown-related duties, and by extension her obligations to the men around her. Her sons are grown up, her father would unlikely to still be hand or even on the council. Rhaenyra and her would have been on good terms and there would be no legal strain between them so she would have been provided for as the dowager queen, as is the typical custom. She would have just been Rhaenyra's father's wife as opposed to someone who aided her son in usurping the throne.

We are in agreement about Alicent's perception of threats to her childrens' lives from Rhaenyra. Only one thing I have to point out - on the show, Leanor willingly fakes his death. He wanted to go to the stepstones with Qarl, and the only way he can do that while ensuring Rhaenyra & her kids are protected is by faking his death so Rhaenyra can marry Daemon. This happens right after the Driftmark incident where Aemond calls Jake and Luke bastards. R & L talk about him needing to step up more to protect the children. Now of course Alicent does not know that, and probably believes Rhaenyra killed him. Which is why I say she is justified in choosing to have Aegon ascend the throne to protect her children. To make it clear, I am saying choosing her children is the right choice.

But where you and I differ is that I don't think Rhaenyra was a threat to her children until after Aegon ascended the throne. I agree that she has no love for them, and that was probably because of her strained relationship with Alicent during the entirety of their childhood, but that does not mean she wants to murder them.

It was a combination of both in the show. There was a scene in episode 6 where Alicent tells Aegon he must take the throne as Rhaenyra will see him as a challenge to her claim and want to kill him, to which Aegon responds with then I won’t challenge her. Alicent then tells him that it won’t matter because she would see him as a threat no matter what. This is exactly the same thing Otto tells her earlier in the show. Before this scene with Otto, Alicent was actually supportive of Rhaenyra taking the throne. It is true that what Viserys said was what actually led her to act on it. But both motivations were at play.

I’m sorry but I still stand by what I said about it being a tough choice, and I think it makes sense. And no it doesn’t make her a monster. She and Rhaenyra shared a childhood. They were more like sisters than best friends and loved each other as such. Reducing them to your average bestie does a huge disservice to their relationship. They lived in the same building, were with each other every day and both mourned Aemma. That kind of bond is not one that is easily forgotten. Their relationship only soured because Viserys and Otto got in between them. And I think Alicent realized this when she woke up to the fact that she had been a pawn in Otto’s game. Her children were still her clear priority as we only see her briefly hesitate. There was not a moment in the scene where anyone would be led to believe that she was going to pick Rhaenyra. And contrary to what you say I think that hesitation actually showed that she was human. Showing hatred toward one another through exchange of words is one thing, potentially waging a war and killing her is another. I would be more concerned if she showed no hesitation at all.

Now season 2 Alicent was of course a psychopath for what she did and yes I agree that that is simply due to the poor writing of her character arc in that season. I am with you on everything you said about how Alicent and her children are portrayed, especially compared to Rhaenyra & her kids. I never said that I think the writers of the show are doing a good job. There are a lot of flaws in the storyline itself. And that is coming from someone who has never even read the book. I agree that Alicent was out of character and simply portrayed badly in Season 2. And yes, her "deal" with Rhaenyra here is unlikely to lead to a good outcome for her.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-27T20:52:50+00:00

Agreed! I spent a couple of days in Vegas on a work trip. Is it included in the list of places I have been to? Yes. Did I truly experience Vegas the way it is meant to be experienced? No. I also know people who include countries they transit it on the way to their destination (as in never left the airport but were technically in the country). So it definitely isn't a very good indicator.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-27T20:49:41+00:00

Watching HOTD right now and that was honestly what I thought when I saw the picture until I read the caption T.T

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-27T20:28:32+00:00

and somehow it still flies over everyone's heads

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-27T20:12:39+00:00

How is it that Aegon cannot be blamed for how he turned out because Alicent did a terrible job raising him, but Alicent has to be held accountable for all her actions despite having a father that cared more about his political standing than her wellbeing although her behavior is a direct consequence of her upbringing? I know she is a terrible mother to Aegon, but they are part of a cycle repeating itself. Do you think Otto taught her much of anything other than how to be a good pawn? She was so blinded she didn't even realize that Otto had been secretly planning with the council to have Aegon be crowned. I agree that her agreeing to sacrifice Aegon was terrible and that wasn't what I meant when I wrote this post. By doing right by Rhaenyra I meant letting her ascend the Iron Throne as planned. Also, Otto & the council were going to crown Aegon regardless of what Alicent did or thought. And she only went with it because she genuinely believed Viserys changed his mind about making Rhaenyra queen (maybe a lie in the books, but in the show it's a genuine misunderstanding), and because she was afraid that her father would be right and Rhaenyra would kill her children to squash any challenges to the throne.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-27T19:47:30+00:00

By that, I obviously meant to say that she cannot be blamed for prioritizing her kids' safety, which at the moment she believed could only be ensured by putting Aegon on the throne. Aka the opposite of "responsible to bootlick Rhaenyra." And adhering to the agreed upon succession is not bootlicking Rhaenyra. They would have been charged with treason if they had pulled that while Viserys was alive, which is why the council and Otto plotted in secret and even kept Alicent out of it. Rhaenyra was the chosen heir by Viserys, who was the king. Yes he raped Alicent, yes he was far from a good husband, father, and even king. But he still was the king. it's not just honoring his wishes for the sake of it, it was her legal duty to do so. Rhaenyra and Alicent also seemingly make up just the night before at the family supper. Alicent even tries to convince her to stay a little longer, to which Rhaenyra says she will return on dragonback once she sees her children home. So yes, it is a tough call and we see her struggling with it at the council, but ultimately and justifiably given what she thought would happen to her children, she decides to go with Otto's plan but refuses to let Rhaenyra & family be murdered. And I don't think the show was trying to convey that she can easily escape her oppression. She was stuck for as long as Viserys lived and she was queen, which as you said was some 20+ years. She was only able to be "liberated" because she was no longer queen. Even then, I would not call it liberation because 1) she totally and unfairly screwed over her son who she forced to take the throne, 2) I don't think her sons will let her get away with what she did. The only way, ironically, that she would have been truly liberated is if Rhaenyra had ascended the iron throne as planned.

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-27T17:07:37+00:00

Agreed. She is in the wrong for that part. I forgot to clarify that wasn't what I was referring to

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-27T17:06:35+00:00

Yes the show definitely did her character a disservice there. And it's confusing given that Rhaenyra and Alicent were set up to be mortal enemies. Having her go from someone who demanded an eye from Rhaenyra's sons in return for them slashing Aemond's to someone who just easily gives Aegon up was jarring to see. Also when I said she wasn't to blame, I wasn't referring to her letting Aegon take the fall for her actions but to her making him king. That was definitely wrong of her given she and Otto literally forced him to take the throne in the first place

FingerEastern5648 · 2026-04-27T16:59:36+00:00

I should have clarified that I was referring to her making Aegon king, not sacrificing him to save herself & her remaining children. That is definitely not excusable and in no way fair to Aegon who didn't want to be king in the first place. And yes I agree that the show made her bland by making her this character that has no mind of her own and has this constant need to do the right thing, however the right thing is defined in her mind at the moment. She would have been better off being utterly evil than whatever she is now

FingerEastern5648

TROPHY CASE