Season 6 Episode 3 "Oathbreaker" - "Non book readers"

Nody

Pre empting the upcoming episode post by including some highlights from the charter. I'll try to set up each episode in advance each week; thread will be unlocked on Sunday evening.

This is ONLY about the specific episode shown on TV! No information from any other source, interviews etc. are allowed to be posted with the one exception that SPOILER tagged lore from the DVD releases and interviews will be allowed in the thread. Such information has to directly relate to the episode however and be clearly marked as for example "DVD lore from Season X relating to matter Y"

Lore and conclusions go here

This means book readers are allowed to post but they can not reference ANYTHING from the books.


In addition anyone picking up 3 yellow cards will be banned from the forum for the current season; in case of serious enough transgressions the ban may come earlier than 3 cards


Thread will be unlocked on Sunday evening.

The Randy Riverbeast

Tree man is such a tease. Better finish that off later in the episode.

I'm actually crying tears of joy at that scene

BlondeMoment

Young Ned Stark = Barney Stinson

J. Marston

Another direwolf down, feck sake...

duffman13

Very good episode, things are really shaping up nicely, I like Lord Umber, every second word was ****. It does feel that everything is going to massively come to head over a couple of episodes.

duffman13

J. Marston wrote: »

Another direwolf down, feck sake...

Disappointed with this, really thought we'd see that one in action. Hopefully it turns out to be a decoy or something!

J. Marston

duffman13 wrote: »

Disappointed with this, really thought we'd see that one in action. Hopefully it turns out to be a decoy or something!

Think it's a cost-saving measure killing it off, to be honest. Those CGI wolves probably cost a fair amount to create.

PressRun

There better be some serious pay-off with Sam's storyline.

duffman13

PressRun wrote: »

There better be some serious pay-off with Sam's storyline.

Agreed, it was only 4 or 5 mins but unlike a lot in that episode I don't see what value it adds or how he will come full circle. The only thing I could guess is that when he's in the Citadel he finds some proof of Jon Snows Lineage otherwise we just have the word of Bran from his visions.

PressRun

duffman13 wrote: »

Agreed, it was only 4 or 5 mins but unlike a lot in that episode I don't see what value it adds or how he will come full circle. The only thing I could guess is that when he's in the Citadel he finds some proof of Jon Snows Lineage otherwise we just have the word of Bran from his visions.

It could be that his story ends up tying in with Jon's in a major way, but it all just feels really irrelevant at the moment and it's moving quite slowly, compared to other storylines.

Speaking of Bran and his visions, young Ned heard him calling him. Can Bran interfere with the course of history through his visions?

duffman13

PressRun wrote: »

Speaking of Bran and his visions, young Ned heard him calling him. Can Bran interfere with the course of history through his visions?

I think it's why his guide seems so reluctant to leave him too long in the visions. There is obviously potential there, I just hope they don't use it to undo some significant part of the present time line. Bran obviously has a huge role to play if they've been waiting a thousand years for him.

leonil7

ser alliser's sin was loyalty for a system he thought was a cause. he would have made a great lord commander .. only if times have not changed. oly defiant to the end, only if he learned how to apologize. he became what he hated. they are the oath-breakers i think in this episode, betrayed their oath of loyalty to their lord commander.

empacher

Every episode is a cliff hanger. It kind of reminds me of lost. In the way that there is so many storylinea, so many new things being introduced, so many possible directions.

Avatar MIA

leonil7 wrote: »

they are the oath-breakers i think in this episode, betrayed their oath of loyalty to their lord commander.

It's oathbreaker singular, not oathbreakers, which would imply John Snow saying his watch was done.

Following on from above - bringing people back from the dead is bad enough, time travel and changing history would be ridiculous. Definitely 'Jumping the Shark' potential with it effectively becoming Sci-Fi.

Dravokivich

Avatar MIA wrote: »

It's oathbreaker singular, not oathbreakers, which would imply John Snow saying his watch was done.

Following on from above - bringing people back from the dead is bad enough, time travel and changing history would be ridiculous. Definitely 'Jumping the Shark' potential with it effectively becoming Sci-Fi.

I'm not sure if "Jumping the Shark" is relevant, as it'd be somewhat expected to tie in with their collaboration with GRR Martin. it can still be fantasy as Sci-Fi would require an element of technology in use.

I thought the scene where they were talking about how they had nothing to talk about was very meta.

leonil7

Avatar MIA wrote: »

leonil7 wrote: »

they are the oath-breakers i think in this episode, betrayed their oath of loyalty to their lord commander.

It's oathbreaker singular, not oathbreakers, which would imply John Snow saying his watch was done.

Following on from above - bringing people back from the dead is bad enough, time travel and changing history would be ridiculous. Definitely 'Jumping the Shark' potential with it effectively becoming Sci-Fi.

jon kept his oath until it expired, not of his own will. in a sense he did not 'break' it. his death however broke it. but thelads hanging did broke their oaths.

Avatar MIA

leonil7 wrote: »

jon kept his oath until it expired, not of his own will. in a sense he did not 'break' it.

He remained in the watch, and indeed as Lord Commander after his resurrection. At what point did his oath expire?

EagererBeaver

Avatar MIA wrote: »

He remained in the watch, and indeed as Lord Commander after his resurrection. At what point did his oath expire?

When he died.

I don't think it was ever explicitly stated, only implied, that he remained Lord Commander by any of the character. Saying he remained in the Watch and as Lord commander is only your interpretation of things.

Avatar MIA

EagererBeaver wrote: »

When he died.

I don't think it was ever explicitly stated, only implied, that he remained Lord Commander by any of the character. Saying he remained in the Watch and as Lord commander is only your interpretation of things.

He kept and wore the LC's cloak while executing 4 people. Where did that authority come from?

He then took off the cloak and seemed to pass on the LC title.

leonil7

jon in my view was an oath keeper. the oath of the night's watch was after all conditional (effective only until one's death). otherwise there is no reason for his men to kill him now that he says 'his watch is ended'. he kept his oath until his death.

the lads who hanged needs to be hanged regardless if jon is no longer bounded by his oath. their death is not dependent on him keeping his oath, but on theirs not keeping their oaths.

EagererBeaver

Avatar MIA wrote: »

He kept and wore the LC's cloak while executing 4 people. Where did that authority come from?

He then took off the cloak and seemed to pass on the LC title.

Again, that's just all implication and interpretation. A guy they're all loyal to rises from the dead. How much rigorous questioning of his authority do you expect they put him through? They're also currently without a Maester to help them interpret the law.

On the other hand, Jon's apaprent belief that his oath has been fulfilled ("my watch has ended") is also open to interpretation and even if perfectly valid, may not be widely accepted. Beyond a few men of the Watch and some wildlings, who else will believe his story if he marches south, rather than just treat him as a deserter?

Avatar MIA

Re the ending, was that shown after the credits?

Avatar MIA

EagererBeaver wrote: »

. A guy they're all loyal to rises from the dead. How much rigorous questioning of his authority do you expect they put him through? They're also currently without a Maester to help them interpret the law.

Now, that's interpretation

EagererBeaver

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Re the ending, was that shown after the credits?

Huh?

Shane St.

Where will Jon be heading ??

Avatar MIA

EagererBeaver wrote: »

Huh?

I missed where the 3 turn up outside castle black, :eek:

EagererBeaver

Avatar MIA wrote: »

I missed where the 3 turn up outside castle black, :eek:

Sorry, missed the previous post. It was in the preview for next week's episode.

Avatar MIA

EagererBeaver wrote: »

Sorry, missed the previous post. It was in the preview for next week's episode.

Major

spoiler

:pac:

Nody

//MOD

People we're only 30 posts in and got spoilers and speculation for the next episode. Please use spoiler tags

without spaces inside the [] if you're going to post something like that or even better put it in the speculation thread where it belongs.

//MOD

juneg

I missed the preview for next week, Yay! something to look forward to tonight now that I watched the episode already

Pretty good but really miss Tywin, Varys, Littlefinger and Tyrion in the scenes in King's Landing.. That whole part seemed forced with the overdoing of Gregor's menace and generally weak characters, Tommen included. And the whole "he's behind me" was a bit like a sitcom.

Everything else was great. Bran's story is the one that has had me interested for ages so it's good to see that he may be able to influence the past.

Of course, just when things were going well for Sansa, Arya and Jon, Rickon gets handed over.

PressRun

With regards Rickon, I'm not sure how interested I am in watching more scenes of Ramsay torturing someone or using a Stark as his plaything.

PressRun

PressRun wrote: »

With regards Rickon, I'm not sure how interested I am in watching more scenes of Ramsay torturing someone or using a Stark as his plaything.

That all happens on his way to power.. With the woman and baby, we just got the setup and I assume, it'll be the same with Rickon.

I hope so anyway. The show doesn't have time to waste on stuff like that.

Avatar MIA

Deleted User wrote: »

And the whole "he's behind me" was a bit like a sitcom.

It was, but the PARP out of the meister was very funny.

OneOfThem Stumbled

Avatar MIA wrote: »

It's oathbreaker singular, not oathbreakers, which would imply John Snow saying his watch was done.

Following on from above - bringing people back from the dead is bad enough, time travel and changing history would be ridiculous. Definitely 'Jumping the Shark' potential with it effectively becoming Sci-Fi.

Time travelling would be seriously bad imo. Visions have been implied to be like looking at a video tape (either in the past or in the future), you can see all the details, but change nothing. But these Bran visions are strange: I thought they were meant to be recorded by those magical weir trees



There was clearly one in Winterfell (we see it in the intro every episode), but in that flashback this episode there certainly didn't seem to be any in Dorne.



Significantly better episode imo. Sam was the only superfluous material (tho I'm not entirely sure where they're going with Arya either).

The previous two episodes had desperately wanted for political action

Edit: It seems I mispredicted Theon being captured and given over to Ramsay. Half points for guessing that someone gets captured ey?

leonil7

goodbye shaggydog
no thanks to oathbreaker house umber.

homerun_homer

So far, bar Ghost, the other Dire wolves have been useless for the Starks.

Daith

homerun_homer wrote: »

So far, bar Ghost, the other Dire wolves have been useless for the Starks.

Summer has been amazing for Bran.

jamo2oo9

In regards to Bran being able to talk to people in the past, there's a theory making its rounds on the internet saying that the Mad King became the Mad King because he was going made due to the whispers (this was said before) and this could be Bran doing it.

From S6E3, Bran realizes that others can hear him during the visions from the past, but doesn't understand that they cannot fully understand him.
He attempts to reason with King Aerys when shown a vision of him.
The King only hears whispers, and is driven mad by it.
Bran tries to fix this, however makes it worse.
Mad King Aerys burns Bran's grandfather alive while Bran frantically tries to stop him.
All he hears is whispers.
Bran sets the events of the show in motion.

expectationlost

leonil7 wrote: »

ser alliser's sin was loyalty for a system he thought was a cause. he would have made a great lord commander .. only if times have not changed. oly defiant to the end, only if he learned how to apologize. he became what he hated. they are the oath-breakers i think in this episode, betrayed their oath of loyalty to their lord commander.

why couldn't he see the the wall wasn't made to stop the wildlings even after all thats happened,with he white walker attack etc

PressRun

jamo2oo9 wrote: »

In regards to Bran being able to talk to people in the past, there's a theory making its rounds on the internet saying that the Mad King became the Mad King because he was going made due to the whispers (this was said before) and this could be Bran doing it.

This would be a kind of insane time loop. I think there needs to be more explanation about the purpose of these visions and trips into the past before it can be said for sure what's going on. Why is the Three-Eyed Raven showing Bran these things from his family's past? I'd like to think that there's a bigger purpose to Bran's powers than just being a medium through which we can see past events.

Fromvert

So Jon has changed, he's going to be a cold, revenge seeking leader of the wildlings I assume. He tried to do what was good/right/just and that only led to his death. Before he would of struggled with hanging Ollie in my opinion even though he helped kill him, he would find it difficult to kill a boy.

Degag

Good episode. Thinking The Hound might be brought back after being mentioned by the Faceless people.... alos if Cersei is going for a trial by combat, who better than to take on The Mountain than her brother???

leonil7

with all the buildup for a war to take back winterfell and the stark army all but gone, me thinks the coming of sansa will make the wildlings bend the knee and swear oath to sansa stark to build up a new stark army.

the night's watch as well may swear a new oath losing their sense of purpose for vigilance. (given their wildling enemies has become their allies).

ShaneU

Wouldn't you have some serious brain damage after being dead for a few days.

Avatar MIA

ShaneU wrote: »

Wouldn't you have some serious brain damage after being dead for a few days.

Yes, but there is no non-supernatural way to bring someone back from the dead. So... Magic.

jamo2oo9

ShaneU wrote: »

Wouldn't you have some serious brain damage after being dead for a few days.

As if science collaborates itself into Game of Thrones :rolleyes:

Fromvert

ShaneU wrote: »

Wouldn't you have some serious brain damage after being dead for a few days.

Arya's brain should be coming out the cracks in her skull she should have at this stage. Arya has a concrete head and Areo Hotah dies instantly with a small stab to the back.

J. Marston

This is a show with dragons, ice zombies and a woman who gave birth to a shadow assassin.

I can deal with the intricacies of brain damage being overlooked.