An important death in Season six of the GOT

edited October 18 in Game Of Thrones

The Boltons... gruesome and grisly... but so well deserved!

Okay, so this is a completely half-baked theory... but what if season two starts after the death of Ramsey? That would mean a complete realignment of the houses. We'd have allies again. I mean, think about all those people who would be angry against a house that helped the Frey's during the Red Wedding. We could take out the Whitehills so much more easily!

Tagged:

Comments

  • I'd like it to start a while before the battle of the bastards, then our character fights in the battle of the bastards and afterwards. Talia gets to go and speak to Ramsey and rub it in his face a bit before Sansa kills him. Mention Ethan and be like, you deserve this, for Ethan.

  • edited September 22

    Also we could move(following the Walder Frey theory),Talia to the Twins and in some part of the story interact with the conflict in Riverrun.Perphaps whitenessed the Blackfish death(there you have your major death) and the Lannisters' capture of the Tully's,keep.

    Other importants killings-off Such as the blowing up of the Sept of Baelor and the deaths of Maergary and Made Tyrell(show canon) could be explore by a Lord Tarwick who could assist the event and giving the man a tragic death among them.
    Being Noble born and a follower of the Faith it would actually make sense for his assistance to Maergary's and Lora's trial.

  • (Rodrik peeks head into dog pit) "Chin up Ramsay, least you have your friends and family to avenge you." (Jigs away)

    I'd like it to start a while before the battle of the bastards, then our character fights in the battle of the bastards and afterw

  • Regardless, we still want to see how the Forresters are going to regroup and survive while the North is still under Bolton rule. Season 2 could lead up to the Battle of the Bastards and I'm totally fine with Rodrik/Asher taking part in the main battle. As well as giving Ramsay a piece of my mind before he becomes dog food.

    Sera's and Tarwick's chances don't seem to look good as they likely would be in the Sept of Baelor.

  • I just don't think that we'd have any time to go see him and give him a piece of our mind while he is being held captive by the Starks. Logistically I just don't think that would work, however satisfying it may be to be able to do so.

    My gods was it satisfying to be able to kill Britt. and to beat up Gryff. I want to just finish off all the Whitehills. Come on TT.

    Regardless, we still want to see how the Forresters are going to regroup and survive while the North is still under Bolton rule.

  • edited October 12

    There's a big gap between the end of The Ice Dragon and the end of the Battle of the Bastards. Ideally this would be Season 3 content, and that colossal 2 year gap would be filled with Season 2. TWD has taught us that large time skips are never a good idea for Telltale.

  • edited October 12

    We certainly don't want Season 3 to mainly be about arguing with the other Northern lords and fighting Wights.

    JakeSt123 posted: »

    There's a big gap between the end of The Ice Dragon and the end of the Battle of the Bastards. Ideally this would be Season 3 cont

  • We are not even 100% sure that we will be getting a second season, yet you are talking about a third?!?

    I took a different lesson from TWD....Telltale is not good with sequels. The quality of character development and storytelling went down with each consecutive season.

    I maintain that the best we can hope for is one FINAL season of GoT that effectively wraps up the Forrester/Whitehill rivalry and ties it into the ending of the tv show.

    JakeSt123 posted: »

    There's a big gap between the end of The Ice Dragon and the end of the Battle of the Bastards. Ideally this would be Season 3 cont

  • Why not? I am ambitious by nature ;)
    Plus the telltale signed a multi season contract for the got series so it's not amusing to speak about it.

    Pahn711 posted: »

    We are not even 100% sure that we will be getting a second season, yet you are talking about a third?!? I took a different less

  • They confirmed a second season 3 days after Episode 6 came out. If they go back on that, it just makes them assholes.

    Pahn711 posted: »

    We are not even 100% sure that we will be getting a second season, yet you are talking about a third?!? I took a different less

  • Yea it would look pretty bad if they cancelled their confirmed second season. I remember a tweet that they met with the writers or something like that sometime ago. Also if they don't make a second season that would put them in trouble with the contract they signed which would cost them a lot. I would rather they make a second season and I don't care if we have to wait a long time in between episodes to get the best game they can make.

    JakeSt123 posted: »

    They confirmed a second season 3 days after Episode 6 came out. If they go back on that, it just makes them assholes.

  • Have you actually read the contract? Stating that it would "put them in trouble" is pure speculation.

    Let's assume it's true that Telltale is waiting to see how the tv show ends before they proceed on S2....doesn't that tell us something about how the game developers perceive the HBO content that they have to work with right now? The circumstances of the Forresters in S1 were largely driven by major events on the tv version.....so to follow the same pattern in S2 (per the contract you guys keep referencing) they would need a fair number of events between the end of seasons 4 and 6 that would impact the Forresters and their status in the North.

    Other than the Battle of the Bastards, I don't see many other significant events that we could reasonably expect the Forresters to have a stake in. So where exactly is this abundance of new content that would take TWO more seasons of the game to cover?

    Yea it would look pretty bad if they cancelled their confirmed second season. I remember a tweet that they met with the writers or

  • The thing is this: why do we need the Forresters to have a stake in the larger story? Sure, the Forresters inhabit GRRM's world, and the first season incorporated actual actors from the show to do voice stuff for the game... but there is nothing saying that they have to. Unless it's in the damn contract that none of us (presumably) have access to. I personally do not want to interact with any big character from the show and thought it sort of weakened the game. We knew we could never kill Ramsay what with his plot armor and all, or really influence Dany to give us fighters... so that was frustrating... or really get help from Tyrion because he'd be in no position to help. All those were non-starters and really very frustrating to have to go through the motions as if it mattered. It would be nice if they could explain why the long delay.

    Pahn711 posted: »

    Have you actually read the contract? Stating that it would "put them in trouble" is pure speculation. Let's assume it's true th

  • edited October 13

    Because:

    -the only reference to guide us is S1, and that is how the first season worked out
    -as we discussed, HBO and Telltale (presumably) have a "contract" to use certain characters and elements from the tv show in the game

    I'm amazed at the people on these forums who say they didn't like having the tv show characters in the game....that was a HUGE part of season 1! How can you both be a fan of the game and not like the interaction with stars of the show?

    ShampaFK posted: »

    The thing is this: why do we need the Forresters to have a stake in the larger story? Sure, the Forresters inhabit GRRM's world, a

  • None of us know what is in that contract. So none of us knows if there is a requirement that characters from the show/book have to be used. If not, then they shouldn't.

    Yes, a huge part of season one did have interactions with the TV show characters - and those were the worst parts of the game. I can like all the new characters and the plot that didn't involve them, and overlook the frustrating, annoying parts that contained the canon characters. I didn't like Dany from the show and I liked her even less after playing season one. I didn't like that Tyrion knowingly placed us in a difficult situation no matter how we behaved with him. It was like, hey... I'm going to do this thing even though it very likely could hurt your family. Oh, and by the way, you seem cool and I really liked your dad but fuck you anyway. Then there was Ramsay. John is just there. He gets all judge-y on you and he doesn't even have all the facts and you can't explain the situation to him. So who cares what this guy thinks anyway... Same with Margaery. Cersei is awful, as expected and dealing with her was not fun. So yeah, all the character interactions were completely annoying.

    Pahn711 posted: »

    Because: -the only reference to guide us is S1, and that is how the first season worked out -as we discussed, HBO and Telltale

  • Hey guys just saying that I hate the new format of the forums...It was better before :neutral:

  • Agreed...unpleasant change!

    Tunak23 posted: »

    Hey guys just saying that I hate the new format of the forums...It was better before

Sign in to comment in this discussion.