nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Your least favourite popular or 'good' character? (Contains Book Spoilers)

TheGlass

Who's your least favourite character thats popular with most fans, or seen as good?

Mine would be Sam. He's pathetic, the ultimate weakling, for the most part just clumsy and getting in the way. People go on about him developing a spine and growing stronger but he just gets worse. The crying after he got the ride and letting Maester Aemon die just did it for me.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Witcher

Jaysus, poor oul Sam getting it in the neck.

Daenerys..I couldn't give a bollocks about her or her dragons. Enough said.

Westeros

From the list above I am caught between Bran and Sam, but went with Bran in the end. I know Bran, in reality, plays the bigger part but I just don't like him, particularly this season. He isn't my least favourite of the show though!

The Pheasant2

Bran chapters bore the bollocks off me.

Just find Arya and that whole faceless men arc uninteresting.

Daenaerys' growing arrogance is also starting to get on my tits.

"I am the blood of the Dragon!"
"Yeah whatever...when you gonna invade Westeros?"

calex71

Ha Bran too for me, hated those parts of the books.

Have a feeling his exploits will come to a whole big pile of nothing good too, last seen being a tree wasn't he? :pac:

Mr.Prodston

TheGlass wrote: »

Who's your least favourite character thats popular with most fans, or seen as good?

Mine would be Sam. He's pathetic, the ultimate weakling, for the most part just clumsy and getting in the way. People go on about him developing a spine and growing stronger but he just gets worse. The crying after he got the ride and letting Maester Aemon die just did it for me.

I don't get the hate for Sam. I see him as a normal person who has found himself in an extraordinary situation.

Sure he is clumsy, not a good fighter, craven at the start and weak despite his size. However not everyone is cut out for battle nor do they need to be. Sam excels in other ways. He's bright, able to write well, read well, and understand what it is.

He found himself North of the Wall facing White Walkers, how many people would cope adequately in any way not to mind somebody who clearly isn't designed for such a situation. However he survives, learns an invaluable piece of info (the obsidian). Maybe it was all a fluke but he survived the mutiny, made it back to the wall with Gilly and her child. How would you or anyone else cope in such a situation. Sure he's an easy target if you want him to be.

Once back at the wall after the battle Sam shows bravery, cunning and strength of character to

get Jon elected as Lord Commander

. That's hardly pathetic? That's a Varys/Littlefinger action.

I'm going to spoiler just incase people who haven't read stumble in.

In Bravoos Sam stands up to Dareon, which takes some guts. Also how on earth he's at fault for the death of an elderly man on such an expedition is something I cannot comprehend. Also he finally gets the ride

and you deride him for that?

None of this is directed specifically towards you, I'd been thinking about Sam being underfire recently and especially after that last episode I think it's very unfair.

I like Sam so perhaps I'm biased the other way :pac: but I think he's interesting and like that he's growing a backbone. Not everyone can be fearless in any and all situations, especially in Westeros!

TimeToShine

Arya is starting to annoy me. Even in the

released TWoW chapter, she STILL hasn't done anything relevant.

. I only have so much patience for those kind of arcs.

Dany I can tolerate because she has Barristan with her + she indirectly has a huge influence on Euron and Victarion. Brienne's arc has actually come to something so she too I can accept. Arya, however, better get her arse to Westeros ASAP.

I think Bran's story will be used to reveal any historic facts so his is OK. Sam I can forgive purely for giving us the scene on the ship, even though I hated his chapters all along.

So, to sum up, I hate everyone except Davos, Stannis, Euron, Victarion, Doran Martell and LF/Varys. Also have a soft spot for Aegon/JonCon and I'd be delighted if they shafted Dany out of a dragon but I doubt it. GRRM seems to have a hard on for his female characters.

Washington Irving

Went with Daenarys based solely on the character. Her chapters contain some of the best minor characters and details from ASOIAF. At least the likes of Sansa and Sam have an empathetic side and start to come into their own, Dany just gets worse.

Barna77

Bran and his bromance with Jojen Yawn Reed. Bore the feck out of me. Die please...

Pepe LeFrits

Bran.

Sam is the sanest man in Westeros. I like him.

Bench Press

Daenarys is starting to get on my tits lately

PhlegmyMoses

calex71 wrote: »

Ha Bran too for me, hated those parts of the books.

Have a feeling his exploits will come to a whole big pile of nothing good too, last seen being a tree wasn't he? :pac:

I think the opposite. I always look forward to Bran chapters as I think he's going to play a huge part.

Wereghost

Methinks this thread is a few days premature...

astonaidan

Sam hes a bitch, christ the way he was acting youd think he was a hero during the battle, hey here Pyp take this bolt, Heroic. Hey here Ghost go kill those people, heroic.

username123

I voted Dany, but I could have easily gone with Bran.

I love Sam the Slayer! He's sound, and as smart as anything. I dunno how he is staying the size he is in the Nights Watch tho!

wispa9

Bran may be boring, but Dany is flat out irritating and I can only dream that GRRM will make her his next big twist, however unlikely that may be.

diegroblers

Robb -

But at least he doesn't stay a problem for me.

Paddy Cow

diegroblers wrote: »

Robb -
But at least he doesn't stay a problem for me.

+1

He agreed to the deal with the Frey's but went ahead and married your one anyways.

He chopped the head of the Karstark guy. He had been warned that it would be better to keep the guy as a prisoner but apparently because of his "principles" he couldn't do this. FFS how stupid can you be? The whole reason he went to war was because Joffrey cut off his father's head. Did he really think that the rest of the Karstarks would support him after what he did?

Witcher

Paddy Cow wrote: »

The whole reason he went to war was because Joffrey cut off his father's head. Did he really think that the rest of the Karstarks would support him after what he did?

In fairness if Karstark hadn't been a fool saying his sons were murdered when Jaime killed them in a fair fight then actually murdering a child himself who had nothing to do with it Robb wouldn't have needed to make that decision.

You can level a lot of accusations at Jaime but he didn't murder Karstark's sons.

Paddy Cow

Blay wrote: »

In fairness if Karstark hadn't been a fool saying his sons were murdered when Jaime killed them in a fair fight then actually murdering a child himself who had nothing to do with it Robb wouldn't have needed to make that decision.

You can level a lot of accusations at Jaime but he didn't murder Karstark's sons.

That's like saying, in fairness, despite being advised to send Ned to the wall, Joffrey only had Ned beheaded after Ned was fool enough to publicly announced that he was a traitor who plotted to kill Joffrey and take the throne for himself. In Joffrey's eyes (and everyone else present) he was justified in beheading Ned. Despite his father naming himself as a traitor, that didn't stop Rob from wanting vengeance.

Watch this scene and replace Joffrey with Rob, Cersei with Catelyn and Stark relatives with Karstark relatives. We don't get a Karstark point of view but I reckon their reaction was pretty much the same as the Starks. The perceived "honour" and "principles" of your enemies don't come into play when you have just seen someone you love beheaded and Rob was too naive/stupid/arrogant to see that
.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PW6wfXPeJTw

No matter how justified Rob felt, he was a fool to do what he did. It reminds me of the advice that Ser Barristan gave to Dani after she took Mereen about how a good leader shows mercy to those you conquer. Dani's reply was that she would show justice and proceeded to do the same thing as the masters and had a load of them nailed to crosses, which p!ssed off a lot of people and created a load of enemies for her.

I see a pattern emerging here. Young people full of ideals in a position of power who don't listen to the advice of their elders:

Joffrey: told to be merciful and send Ned to the wall, has him beheaded, starts a war, ends up dead
Rob: told to be merciful and keep Karstark as a prisoner, has him beheaded, loses half his army, ends up dead
Dani: told to be merciful, kills/crucifies her enemies, ends up with a load more enemies with her future unknown.

Joffrey was an out and out cnut so it was easy to hate him for what he did but if you can put aside his cnutishness and look at it objectively, he didn't behave any differently than Rob or Dani. All three felt justified in what they did but none of them thought about the long term consequences of their actions.

Washington Irving

Paddy Cow wrote: »

That's like saying, in fairness, despite being advised to send Ned to the wall, Joffrey only had Ned beheaded after Ned was fool enough to publicly announced that he was a traitor who plotted to kill Joffrey and take the throne for himself. In Joffrey's eyes (and everyone else present) he was justified in beheading Ned. Despite his father naming himself as a traitor, that didn't stop Rob from wanting vengeance.

I don't think the context of those executions should be ignored. Ned was doing exactly what an 'honourable' man would have done. He did nothing morally wrong, was acting for the good of the realm and according to the law and his loyalty to King Robert.

Rickard murdered two child hostages, betraying the king he pledged allegiance to because his sons died in a fair fight with Jaime Lannister.

I agree on your other point that it was naive of Robb to do it and it was inevitable he would lose support, but it was the 'right' thing to do. Himself and Eddard were victims of their own stubborn sense of honour, Rickard Karstark got what he deserved according to the law. I see where you're coming from on Ned's beheading being justified in Joffrey's eyes, but Robb had a strong cause to believe that it was not justified (and happened to be correct). There was no denying what Rickard did was treason.

Paddy Cow

Washington Irving wrote: »

I don't think the context of those executions should be ignored. Ned was doing exactly what an 'honourable' man would have done. He did nothing morally wrong, was acting for the good of the realm and according to the law and his loyalty to King Robert.

Rickard murdered two child hostages, betraying the king he pledged allegiance to because his sons died in a fair fight with Jaime Lannister.

I agree on your other point that it was naive of Robb to do it and it was inevitable he would lose support, but it was the 'right' thing to do. Himself and Eddard were victims of their own stubborn sense of honour, Rickard Karstark got what he deserved according to the law. I see where you're coming from on Ned's beheading being justified in Joffrey's eyes, but Robb had a strong cause to believe that it was not justified (and happened to be correct). There was no denying what Rickard did was treason.

If you read my last post, you would see that I didn't overlook the context of each execution. As I had said, each had their own reasons for doing so and each felt justified. From the bit I bolded you agree that Richard was a traitor, so he deserved to have his head cut off. How is that any different from Ned publically stating that he is a traitor?

The only difference is that we got to see things from the Stark point of view, got attached to them, make allowances for them and when they were put in the same position as their aggressors and made the same bad decisions we make allowances for their bad judgment/behaviour.

Honestly, putting aside all the other influences, as outlined in my post above, do you think there is much difference between the way Joffrey, Rob and Dani handled their situations?

We can argue until we're blue in the face that Joffrey should've sent Ned to the wall, Robb should've kept your man in chains and Dani should've been merciful.

It didn't happen. Getting back on topic, my argument is that Rob was a hypocritical eejit who knew that Lord Frey was super sensitive and his support was vital to winning the war.

When Rob married your one, he lost his moral high ground. He showed that he was willing to risk the war for his own personal gain and that attitude resonated in his Lords (which is why Bolton turned). After he married Jayne, his own men knew he had fcuked up (Karstark wasn't shy in giving his opinion) this weakened his position.

Tell me, did Rob chop the head off his mother when he realised she released Jamie? She was a traitor for what she did but Rob made allowances.

As much as I found the Red Wedding shocking, it was inevitable.

Lingua Franca

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

I think the opposite. I always look forward to Bran chapters as I think he's going to play a huge part.

Bran is gonna tell You-Know-Nothing-Jon-Snow who his mammy and daddy were and that Dany's on her way to smash **** up. Then he's gonna make like a tree and get back to his roots.

Tzar Chasm

I tolerate Bran chapters because I expect them to go somewhere.

I have an offbeat theory about brans purpose,

when bran wargs with smmer they are linked, but bran is in control, theoretically summers mind would be in brans body too.

I think that when bran eventually wargs with a dragon the dragon will be able to also warg at will into bran, so we'll end up with bran randomly speaking valerian and giving us the dragons pov on the whole thing

Washington Irving

Paddy Cow wrote: »

If you read my last post, you would see that I didn't overlook the context of each execution. As I had said, each had their own reasons for doing so and each felt justified. From the bit I bolded you agree that Richard was a traitor, so he deserved to have his head cut off. How is that any different from Ned publically stating that he is a traitor?

The only difference is that we got to see things from the Stark point of view, got attached to them, make allowances for them and when they were put in the same position as their aggressors and made the same bad decisions we make allowances for their bad judgment/behaviour.

I'm not denying that Ned's execution wasn't deserved from Joffrey's standpoint. Ned's beheading was as justified to Joffrey as Rickard Karstark's was to Robb.

Honestly, putting aside all the other influences, as outlined in my post above, do you think there is much difference between the way Joffrey, Rob and Dani handled their situations?

We can argue until we're blue in the face that Joffrey should've sent Ned to the wall, Robb should've kept your man in chains and Dani should've been merciful.

From each of those character's positions they are very similar situations, but that doesn't mean Robb's execution of Karstark cancels out Joffrey's execution of Ned, or makes Robb a hypocrite (his letting Catelyn all but get away with releasing Jaime is another matter).

The Karstarks cannot deny Rickard committed treason. Robb has valid reasons to believe that Ned was innocent so was entirely justified in his rebellion.

Ned's death: Joffrey believes Ned is a traitor and that he should be executed. Robb believes Ned is innocent and should not be punished. Ned is killed and Robb rebels.

Rickard's death: Robb believes Rickard is a traitor and that he should be executed. The Karstark's have to accept Rickard is guilty no matter what his reasons were. Rickard is killed and the Karstarks desert Robb.

It didn't happen. Getting back on topic, my argument is that Rob was a hypocritical eejit who knew that Lord Frey was super sensitive and his support was vital to winning the war.

When Rob married your one, he lost his moral high ground. He showed that he was willing to risk the war for his own personal gain and that attitude resonated in his Lords (which is why Bolton turned). After he married Jayne, his own men knew he had fcuked up (Karstark wasn't shy in giving his opinion) this weakened his position.

Tell me, did Rob chop the head off his mother when he realised she released Jamie? She was a traitor for what she did but Rob made allowances.

As much as I found the Red Wedding shocking, it was inevitable.

Robb didn't go back on his agreement with the Freys out of selfishness or spite. He did to protect Jeyne's 'honour' after he took her maidenhead. It was extremely naive but it doesn't make him a hypocrite. Going back to my earlier point about him and his father both being victims of their own stubborn honour.

He was hypocritical insofar as Catelyn did not receive the same treatment as Karstark.

Paddy Cow wrote: »

The whole reason he went to war was because Joffrey cut off his father's head. Did he really think that the rest of the Karstarks would support him after what he did?

What I'm trying to get across is the difference in these situations. Robb believed Ned was innocent and was wrongfully executed. The Karstarks could not claim the same for Rickard.

Yes, it was foolish because it inevitable he would lose support, but it was a completely different situation to Ned, which is what I meant by 'context' in my previous post.

Grimebox

Has to be Bran. That whole plot line is terrible. I let an audible groan when he decided against meeting Jon Snow and continuing with his poorly motivated quest.

Paddy Cow

Washington Irving wrote: »

I'm not denying that Ned's execution wasn't deserved from Joffrey's standpoint. Ned's beheading was as justified to Joffrey as Rickard Karstark's was to Robb.........

What I'm trying to get across is the difference in these situations. Robb believed Ned was innocent and was wrongfully executed. The Karstarks could not claim the same for Rickard.

Rob could not claim that Ned was innocent when Ned stood in front of all in KL and declared that he wanted to kill Joffrey and take the throne for himself. My gripe with Rob is that in spite of going to war because his father was beheaded, Rob did the same thing and beheaded his most important ally. However you justify it, the Karstarks didn't have the same reason, which is why they abandoned Rob.

Witcher

Paddy Cow wrote: »

Rob could not claim that Ned was innocent when Ned stood in front of all in KL and declared that he wanted to kill Joffrey and take the throne for himself.

There's pretty much nobody, highborn at least, that thinks Ned was trying to take the throne for himself, even Cersei. Tywin was against his execution when he found out, even Stannis knew Ned wasn't trying to take the throne and he curses everyone who even looks sideways at the IT.

SeantheMan

The list is skewed though.
I don't think anyone considers Bran, Brienne or Sansa as popular characters.
They are main characters yeah...and get their own chapters.

So someone missing from the above, in a similar vain..who is also a main character that I hate.....Cersei. Couldn't care less about her story

And Sansa, and Brienne....and CATELYN STARK !! (constantly fcking up everything for her son) She couldn't die soon enough.....but then she comes back

Witcher

SeantheMan wrote: »

The list is skewed though.
I don't think anyone considers Bran, Brienne or Sansa as popular characters.
They are main characters yeah...and get their own chapters.

The POV's characters will always be amongst the most popular one's in the series. You get a lot of hardline Sansa etc. fans over on Westeros.org.

bopper

SeantheMan wrote: »

The list is skewed though.
I don't think anyone considers Bran, Brienne or Sansa as popular characters.
They are main characters yeah...and get their own chapters.

Really? Bran fair enough, but I always hear Brienne and Sansa being named as two of the most popular characters.