Game of Thrones begins....

[Barrister]

it'll matter to Dani in that it'll show her character. is she trying to get the crown because it's rightfully hers, or because she wants power. The north should side with Jon (if it becomes an issue), dorn is effectively leaderless as is the high garden. the vale will side with sansa who will side with jon (even if only to get the warden of the north title). Doesn't matter who the lannisters pick because they're losing the war. its a moot point as to whether the legitimacy is believed, I think.

How exactly does Targaryn succession work anyways?  Since they're a row of brother-sister marriages, did the brother-King and sister-Queen (each of whom had identical claim to the throne) rule as equals?  Or is it strictly patriarchal?  And in any event Daenarys was the daughter of the last king, King Aerys.  Jon Snow is merely the grandson of the last king - does that make a difference?

But even if patriarchal, the Targaryen's valued purity of blood.  Daenarys is a pure Targaryen, while Jon is half-Stark, and doesn't have the classic Valyrian features. 

All of which is to say - why is it said that Jon has the better claim than Dany to the Targaryen succession?

[Habbaku]

was it confirmed the blackfish had a second miraculous escape?

Nah. In the books, he's quite alive. In the show, he seems to have been killed off-screen at the Siege of Riverrun.

So, they've left it open if they want to bring him back for a last hurrah. Ditto for anything to do with Edmure.

[Habbaku]

Targaryen's

Seriously, why do you hate everything that's good and holy?

[HVC]

it'll matter to Dani in that it'll show her character. is she trying to get the crown because it's rightfully hers, or because she wants power. The north should side with Jon (if it becomes an issue), dorn is effectively leaderless as is the high garden. the vale will side with sansa who will side with jon (even if only to get the warden of the north title). Doesn't matter who the lannisters pick because they're losing the war. its a moot point as to whether the legitimacy is believed, I think.

How exactly does Targaryn succession work anyways?  Since they're a row of brother-sister marriages, did the brother-King and sister-Queen (each of whom had identical claim to the throne) rule as equals?  Or is it strictly patriarchal?  And in any event Daenarys was the daughter of the last king, King Aerys.  Jon Snow is merely the grandson of the last king - does that make a difference?

But even if patriarchal, the Targaryen's valued purity of blood.  Daenarys is a pure Targaryen, while Jon is half-Stark, and doesn't have the classic Valyrian features. 

All of which is to say - why is it said that Jon has the better claim than Dany to the Targaryen succession?

I mentioned I wasn't 100% sure about how hierarchy works, especially with the sequence of deaths, but the targs have married out before but the fact that it's even mentioned leads to  believe jon is the rightful heir. Jon's great-great and great-great-great grandfathers married other noble houses, so it's not unheard of. Rhaeger himself married twice to non targs.

[Habbaku]

How exactly does Targaryn succession work anyways?  Since they're a row of brother-sister marriages, did the brother-King and sister-Queen (each of whom had identical claim to the throne) rule as equals?  Or is it strictly patriarchal?  And in any event Daenarys was the daughter of the last king, King Aerys.  Jon Snow is merely the grandson of the last king - does that make a difference?

Eldest son and his line inherit. This has been established for quite some time thanks to the Dance of Dragons (Targaryen Civil War) that takes place far in advance of the show's timeline. The crowned heads didn't rule equally--the male was always the one invested with power, even if one of the women had substantial say in matters. This is true of all the Seven Kingdoms save for Dorne. Jon being the grandson makes no difference--he's the eldest son of the eldest son of the previous king. He has precedence in succession.

But even if patriarchal, the Targaryen's valued purity of blood.  Daenarys is a pure Targaryen, while Jon is half-Stark, and doesn't have the classic Valyrian features. 

All of which is to say - why is it said that Jon has the better claim than Dany to the Targaryen succession?

If Jon is "half Stark" then others in the Targaryen dynasty are "half-Highhtower" and "half-Velaryon". The half has never mattered--it's descent from Aegon the Conqueror that matters to a large extent. Missing the key features of Valyrians is, however, not a good thing. But affinity with dragons will likely fix that...

See above for why Jon has the better claim.

[Razgovory]

I wonder if that means Jon will abdicate the title of King in the North in favor of Sansa.  She certainly has more on the ball than Jon, who let's face it, is kind of dumb.

we already abdicated as king of the north. or at least demoted himself down to Warden. But yeah, he'll probably give it to Sansa (who will probably marry gendry)

I suspect the fact that Sansa and Tyrion are still technically married will come up.  My guess is that marriage will serve to unite the houses to Stark and Lannister.

[Admiral Yi]

Good one Raz. 

It helps that he didn't rape her. 

[Camerus]

I wonder whether the extinguishing of so many of the great houses will usher in a political system considerably different from what went before, perhaps more like the Night's Watch, and where e.g. union of houses means much less. It'd also have the advantage of being flattering to our modern sensibilities.

[grumbler]

How exactly does Targaryn succession work anyways?  Since they're a row of brother-sister marriages, did the brother-King and sister-Queen (each of whom had identical claim to the throne) rule as equals?  Or is it strictly patriarchal?  And in any event Daenarys was the daughter of the last king, King Aerys.  Jon Snow is merely the grandson of the last king - does that make a difference?

As pointed out above, Jon inherited the status of crown prince with the death of his father.  Daenarys only had a claim based on the presumption that all of Rhaegar's children were dead.

But even if patriarchal, the Targaryen's valued purity of blood.  Daenarys is a pure Targaryen, while Jon is half-Stark, and doesn't have the classic Valyrian features. 

Daenarys wasn't of "pure blood" either, since the Targaryens had married outside the family for generations.  Dani is as much Blackwood as she is Targaryen.

All of which is to say - why is it said that Jon has the better claim than Dany to the Targaryen succession?

Because the rules of succession say his claim is better, if he was a legitimate son of Rhaegar.

[Habbaku]

I wonder whether the extinguishing of so many of the great houses will usher in a political system considerably different from what went before, perhaps more like the Night's Watch, and where e.g. union of houses means much less. It'd also have the advantage of being flattering to our modern sensibilities.

I think it's highly unlikely the Westeros that is standing (if any is) after the series concludes is a Westeros with a strong, feudal system akin to what it had before the War of the Five Kings. Too much chaos, too much turbulence, too many dead nobles, too much toppling of the great houses, too little proof that the system can actually protect its people.

Perhaps the entire realm breaks into its constituent kingdoms again? Or perhaps a more heavily-restricted nobility along the lines of what Rhaegar wanted is in the cards?

[Camerus]

I'm going to go with anywhere from an elected ruler like in TNW to a Magna Carta-like monarchy. Some reasons the hereditary monarchy might end is it solves the problem of mad Targaryens and unfit men like Robert, the fact that Jon and Dany probably can't have kids and will need to make arrangements, addresses the recurring theme of incest, and also because other governmental systems have been shown to be possible nearby or even within Westeros (Free Cities, NW, etc).

[The Minsky Moment]

I think the system goes into permanent stasis because no way Martin publishes more material for that part of the timeline even if by some miracle of modern science and cholesterol reduction, he manages to finish the series.

[Habbaku]

I think the system goes into permanent stasis because no way Martin publishes more material for that part of the timeline even if by some miracle of modern science and cholesterol reduction, he manages to finish the series.

If you're bored of the topic, why comment?

[The Minsky Moment]

Touchy, touchy

[Oexmelin]

If Martin follows the historical cues of the 16th century, on which he has explicitly based large parts of his  story, there should be a move toward greater, "absolute", power of the monarch.