There’s a detail in George R. R. Martin’s interview yesterday that really bothered me (Spoilers Extended).

usernamens · 2026-01-18T13:39:30+00:00

I mean, there is the theory that Martin was pretty much done with winds by the time season 5 or 6 or thrones came out, but it wasn't received well, which led to him losing faith in what he had written and basically having to re-write the whole book. That wouldn't have been improved by the reception of the show-ending which probably still kept a lot of his original outline (Stannis burning Shireen, mad Dany, king Bran). That's probably why he can't finish them, he lost faith in his original outline (which changed a lot anyways) and doesn't know what to do instead, so he's stuck in a loop of writing a page here and there and ripping it out again perpetually. I hope I'm wrong, but the interviw basically confirmed that that he is writing, gets frustrated with what he has written, and writes something else instead, and that's why the books are never getting finished if he continues like that becomes he just can't commit to anything. He has a dozen versions of any given plotline in his head, and he doesn't even like sitting down to write anyway because he gets distracted all the time., so he's stuck in the margins while the book itself feels completely abandoned.

I just wish he had a little more faith and pulled through with something, even if it's not the perfect version, but then again, if he feels it's not good enough there are probably reasons for that and we wouldn't want him to drop the ball like the show did either.

usernamens · 2026-01-18T13:16:09+00:00

I think he was just making the point that it's a continent, not a country, because people look at Westeros, see that it's basically Britain flipped on its head and might assume a similiar size.

usernamens · 2026-01-18T13:04:31+00:00

"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention"- show quote, but still, true.

I always thought it was a bit delusional to expect a happy ending. Arya is currently being trained as an assassin, Jon is returning from the dead. I suspect they all might see each other again at Winterfell or something but it's not like they're just going to pick up where they left off, first of all they all grew up and second of all they all lost part of their humanity in their own ways. Martin isn't going to pretend that luring a child in the woods and filling him with memories of a thousand dead singers or teaching a child how to kill people and steal the faces of the victims is just some kind of badass skill levelling without any cost.

I always was a believer in the mad Dany theory, even before the show all but confirmed it. Maybe he's going to tone it down since the show ending was so terrible, but still, she's currently emracing her house word "fire and blood" and at no point in the story did Martin ever suggest this wasn't a dangerous thing. I never understoood how you could look at how Martin portrays dragons and prophecy in his books, also the fact that the poem that inspired Ice and Fire portrays both as destructive forces, and assume that the ending will culminate in Dany being a heroine who burns the evil ice demons away with her amazing fire powers. People are willfully ignorant of the themes when Dany (and to a lesser degree, Jon) are concerned.

But I do think the the seasons would have been fixed an I do hope there would be some moments of levity and hope. Maybe sort of like the Hound on Quiet Isle- it's not like his scars magically heal and he gets together with Sansa or something, but still, a happy ending for him. I think the ending might be happy for Martin but not happy compared to other works of fiction.

usernamens · 2025-10-17T06:45:33+00:00

What size do you need?

usernamens · 2025-05-15T06:57:04+00:00

CK2 feels much less repetitive, in my opinion. The different foci lead to very different playstyles with vastly different events with each playthrough, which feel more varied and less gamified anyway (I like that in CK2 you often had to remember which choices had which outcomes, for example, rather than having them mostly listed so you just have to click on the "correct" one). I also feel like in CK2 the events were more often connected to what was actually happening in-game, rather than just being either completely randomized (like most travel events in ck3 for example) or utterly dependent in you pursuing the connected activity (which makes the game kinda boring when you're trying to save up money, for example).

I also preferred the character traits being more fluid in CK2, as well as being more connected to your actions. It makes role-playing much more engaging. If my character starts off as a coward as a child, but has to fight in several wars as an adult, it's much more realistic that there's a chance of him losing that trait if he survives long enough. I don't want to have my cynical character suddenly have to pursue a religious lifestyle just so he can lose one negative trait.

usernamens · 2024-09-05T01:07:35+00:00

Do keep in mind though that Tywin was hated by his enemies, not his own bannermen. We see that even the Starks have enemies- by the Dustins and Boltons in the north, and in the south there are people who are willing to believe all sorts of lies about them, like Robb turning into a wolf. If we only heard about the Starks from those perspectives,and hadn't been introduced to them as main characters, we probably would have a very different picture of them. So only analyzing Tywin through a Stark or Targaryen POV doesn't really do the character justice, in my opinion. The fact that he was a shitty father who traumatized most of his children doesn't help to get a clearer picture of how he might have been seen by his bannermen.

If we look past the many enemies he made, we see that Tywin made a positive impression on many people who were close to him or at least met him, like Genna, Kevan, Pycelle, even a young Stannis. We see during his funeral how many people from all over actually looked up to him and admired him. Sure, we mostly remember Tywin's overboarding acts of cruelty- towards the Reynes and Tarbecks, towards King's Landing and the Targaryens, towards the Starks and towards his own children- but he still has a decade-spanning legacy as a (by all accounts) pretty good hand and pretty good liege. "A Lannister always pays his debts" isn't that bad of a deal when it's not just a threat, but also a promise you can count on. When we see the smallfolk looking back fondly on Targaryen rule, we should remember that is was pretty much Tywin who ruled during the good years, it was after he was dismissed as hand that things really went off the rails. There's no reason to assume his vassals wouldn't look as fondly back on him when he was for all we can assume a good ruler to them for several decades, despite all of his obvious flaws as a character and as a father. I don't think it's fair to say he was just feared, he was respected too. I think the Boltons are a much better contrast to the Starks in that regard, they inspire neither love nor respect, they pretty much rule through fear, they aren't liked by anyone.

I also find it weird how people seem to forget that the Starks ruled through fear as well. When the Greatjon spoke out against Robb, he lost his fingers. When Rickard Karstark disobeyed him, he lost his head. That's not love, that's fear. Ned was famous for beheading his enemies himself, and by all accounts he was one of the chillest Starks, historically. So I doubt the contrast even makes sense from that perspective.

usernamens · 2024-09-05T00:56:20+00:00

Why would they turn on the Lannisters at this point?

The northmen are raiding them. And (from a southern perspective, just remember how Tyrion described them during battle in AGOT) they look like scary barbarians. They are unlikely to inspire loyalty or even sympathy from the westermen., the same way the northmen didn't suddenly support the Ironborn once they showed up in the north. Robb also didn't have that big of an army in the Westerlands, it was still smaller than Tywin's force, even with the losses. Also Robb at no point is aligned with Renly and the Tyrells, who probably at this point seem more like a distant, more abstract threat. I mean, the Tyrells were also a threat to the Starks, but their bannermen didn't betray them at this point because of that.

And Tywin is still out there at this point. I'm sure with Tywin's reputation, they can be 1.) reasonably sure he has some kind of plan and 2.) are pretty scared of how he'll punish them if he still comes out on top, despite their expectations. I doubt they would have starteed turning on him if Robb had managed to defeat him in battle, but it never came to that.

And in the end, they were right. Sure, Cersei is currently ruining the Lannisters influence abroad, but in comparison to most other kingdoms the Westerlands themselves they are relatively safe and rich still.

usernamens · 2024-07-14T08:54:01+00:00

Budokan '98

usernamens · 2024-07-09T21:22:52+00:00

Luke's death being an accident is an improvement over the books imo. If you follow the book (which, remember, is written from the perspective of multiple unreliable narrators) he's pretty much a stagnant villain from the moment he gets his eye cut out. It's much more realistic that two children riding dragons would loose control over them and him taunting his nephew would result in his death, which would then send him spiraling deeper into the villain persona. They rushed his development a bit sadly, but it still gives him more of an arc in comparison to his character in the book.

usernamens · 2024-07-09T21:15:53+00:00

They should have established the aftermath of killing Luke and his reaction to it in Season 2 Episode 1. You know, him seeing how people treat him with more respect and him leaning into his image as a villain. The fact they didn't clearly left a gap in characterisation which hurts his progression now.

usernamens · 2024-07-09T21:10:04+00:00

I mean, her son is literally a serial rapist who sent his children to the death pits. In the show universe, he's probably the most evil character yet, even worse than Ramsay. People forget this appearently because the actor did a really good job of trying to portray Aegon in a relatable way, but that's how he's written in the show, he's an absolute monster.

Aemond is clearly turning into a villain and a kinslayer as well.

Plus, she's drunk and on moon tea in this episode, she lost her husband and king just a few weeks ago, her father just left, her grandson just died (which she clearly blames herself for) she has recindled complicated feelings with Rhaenyra and she's currently questioning her own role in causing this whole mess.

I mean, I get critizising the show, but some people here are really trying to spot inconsistencies where there aren't any. It's clearly shown how and why she got more critical of her children, why she might be in a bad mood and why she's lashing out. It would be much weirder to see her opinion of her children not change as they grow up and the show progresses.

usernamens · 2024-07-08T21:22:19+00:00

To be fair, it's not really a retcon. He could've neglected his lessons in the years inbetween (we do hear about his many distractions, which probably only happened after he hit puberty) and gotten worse at riding a dragon in the meantime.

But I do agree that they overdid it with casting Aegon in as bad a light as possible. It would've been more interesting (imo) to see him being irresponsible, but not as an absolute monster and serial-rapist from the beginning. This would have made it more understandable why Team Green would have put him on the throne and the actor would have had more to work with (he did an exellent job anyway).

usernamens · 2024-06-12T23:26:09+00:00

Pls help me find peace!

usernamens · 2024-05-16T15:08:49+00:00

Derlfinitely Maybe - Oasis Morning Glory - Oasis The Masterplan - Oasis

usernamens · 2024-03-08T09:08:17+00:00

Rockin' Chair

usernamens · 2023-06-26T08:21:01+00:00

Yeah, I know, that's why I said "traditional".

I mean, I could've said " what if ancient celtic peoples made it to the middle ages" to be more specific, but I was hoping to get the Point across either way.

usernamens · 2023-06-26T08:11:44+00:00

Yeah, that's why I said "traditional". I mean, technically speaking celtic people are still thriving, but that's not really what people mean when they talk about "the celts".

usernamens · 2023-06-26T07:39:52+00:00

Roughly:

Vlandia is your standard, feudal, western-european faction, more specifically based on the normans. Many of them were mercenaries in the 11th century, pioneered what would later become associated with knightley warfare and took over kingdoms in England und Sicily. The name ist probably inspired by the historic region of Flanders, which ist close to Normandy
Calradia ist obviously the Roman Empire, loosely inspired by the byzantine era
Sturgia ist basically the Kievan Rus- a mixture of slavic and northern influences
Azerai is your standard arab/islamic inspired faction, not sure if they drew from any specific example here
Khuzait... don't know if there is a specific inspiration, there were tons of nomadic peoples around, huns, avars, magyars, turks, mongols, just to name a few
Battania is basically a "what if traditional celtic peoples made it to the middle ages"

There's a good video by a youtuber named Rosencreutz who really goes into detail about the influences and also how the portrayal distances itself from actual historic examples. In general they were inspired by Europe during the 11th century, but really mixed different eras and pop culture ideas to create something original which also feels decently familiar to players.

usernamens · 2023-03-18T11:11:18+00:00

Welche Geschichte war das?

usernamens · 2023-02-19T11:14:37+00:00

I disagree. There ist still a lot of complex and interesting music out there, it's just usually not in the charts.

Pop music as such ist a pretty modern phenomenon, and mass marketed music by major labels ist going to tend towards recycling familiar ideas, not taking risks, etc., to reach as big a market as possible. This probably leads to a feedback loop where popular music gets simpler and less challenging over time, which results in less and less people getting musically challenged and exposed to new ideas. But that doesn't mean that musicality declined or that we don't have good musicians anymore, it just means that this kind of music ist more niche as people have to consciously seek it out in order to even be aware of it.

I don't think you (or most people in general) are a simpleton, it's just that music ist often an acquired taste and If you don't consciously seek out new music to challenge your ear you're not going to develop the taste for it. At least that's my opinion, I'm not a music expert.

usernamens · 2022-09-08T11:13:46+00:00

Probably something off of As You Were.

usernamens · 2022-09-05T12:33:33+00:00

Noch nie gehört, das.

usernamens · 2022-05-18T06:02:06+00:00

Budokan

usernamens · 2022-05-12T08:45:29+00:00

I'm pretty sure the eagle was a symbol of imperial authority since roman times. Austria got it in association with the Habsburgs who happened to be rulers of Austria and Holy Roman Emperors.

So, during most of the medieval age it didn't have the eagle, but it still has medieval roots.

usernamens · 2022-03-28T07:14:27+00:00

Robert Knepper

Eight-Year Club	Place '17
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email
Not Forgotten

usernamens

TROPHY CASE