Game of Thrones begins....

[grumbler]

Translation: He was a moron, an Ramsay out thought him.

You are agreeing with me here. My point is that the character of Jon was intended to be a pretty bright guy who was something of a natural leader of soldiers.

Certainly if they had written this in such a way that Jon beat Ramsay by out-thinking him, we would not all be sitting here saying "Oh man, that makes no sense! Jon is just a kid, no way he could beat Ramsay!"

His plan was fine, but plans don't matter if the moment the fight starts you just do exactly what the other guy obviously wants you to do. my beef isn't that what he did was not believable, it is that it was shitty writing.

I'm not sure you can have it both ways:  if Jon had outsmarted Ramsay, you'd complain that the writers lasy because they just followed the same old boring formula used in every other hero's story.  Since he didn't outsmart him (or, at least, allowed his temper to get the better of him after Ramsay started his charge - which is just what Jon's plan called for), you call the writers lazy because, if Jon's plan doesn't work as expected, it must be because "he was a moron."  The writers can't win either way on that complaint, so i don't think you are being reasonable.

Now, there were other ways to add twists to the battle and not make it strain credulity (like "let's not have Jon's army just stand there while being surrounded") whose absence can more reasonably be blamed on lazy writing.  The timing of the Knights' charge would have been far more believable if they'd just taken thirty seconds to show Littlefinger and the commander of the knights observing the battle, with the commander asking "now?" and Littlefinger saying "not yet, the situation isn't ripe."  That would show Littlefinger at his conniving best and make the last-minute rescue credible (plus set up future conflicts by allowing Sansa or Jon to find out that he had delayed his attack).  Things like that could add complexity at no extra cost.

Yeah, and get rid of the huge pile of dead, too.  Who in their right minds would say "hey, wouldn't it be a good idea if I climbed that mountain of dead people so I could fight there, where there is no footing?"  A couple of dead guys on top of one another makes sense; a mountain of them makes no sense.

[LaCroix]

hey grumbler, did you watch the "behind the scenes" afterward? I wondered about the dead mounds while the battle played out (assumed maybe it did happen here and there IRL), and one of the creators mentioned the civil war when referring to the mounds. 

[Berkut]

Translation: He was a moron, an Ramsay out thought him.

You are agreeing with me here. My point is that the character of Jon was intended to be a pretty bright guy who was something of a natural leader of soldiers.

Certainly if they had written this in such a way that Jon beat Ramsay by out-thinking him, we would not all be sitting here saying "Oh man, that makes no sense! Jon is just a kid, no way he could beat Ramsay!"

His plan was fine, but plans don't matter if the moment the fight starts you just do exactly what the other guy obviously wants you to do. my beef isn't that what he did was not believable, it is that it was shitty writing.

I'm not sure you can have it both ways:  if Jon had outsmarted Ramsay, you'd complain that the writers lasy because they just followed the same old boring formula used in every other hero's story.  Since he didn't outsmart him (or, at least, allowed his temper to get the better of him after Ramsay started his charge - which is just what Jon's plan called for), you call the writers lazy because, if Jon's plan doesn't work as expected, it must be because "he was a moron."  The writers can't win either way on that complaint, so i don't think you are being reasonable.

No, my bitch about Jon being stupid is that it is just lame and makes me not like the character - he *deserved* to lose that battle, and it bugs me that they made him into a moron in order to serve their lazy writing that demands that the protagonist be put into some kind of false tension so we can all be nervous about him making it.

My goal here is not to bitch about the writing, so if they had done something else that worked better, I would not bitch about it - I am not looking for a reason to find their writing trite, I am assuming that they are being trite because I can't imagine another reason why they would write it in such a silly fashion.

My response that this could have been done another way was to refute the claim made by viper that the writers HAD to write it this way because in fact Jon is an idiot and there was no way to write this otherwise.

[The Minsky Moment]

It's hard to say how someone can and should react when a deranged mad man fires arrows at one's baby brother.  I lack sufficient experience in the area to ascertain how easy it is to maintain discipline in that scenario.

[Berkut]

He is a commander of other men whose lives are in his hands. Sacrificing all of them in a vain attempt to save his brother is idiotic.

Sansa was right - Rickon was already dead.

[Josquius]

I think the thing with Jon there is to show how stereotypical Mary Sue heroes, in their quest to always do the good thing, fuck up in reality.

[grumbler]

Translation: He was a moron, an Ramsay out thought him.

You are agreeing with me here. My point is that the character of Jon was intended to be a pretty bright guy who was something of a natural leader of soldiers.

Certainly if they had written this in such a way that Jon beat Ramsay by out-thinking him, we would not all be sitting here saying "Oh man, that makes no sense! Jon is just a kid, no way he could beat Ramsay!"

His plan was fine, but plans don't matter if the moment the fight starts you just do exactly what the other guy obviously wants you to do. my beef isn't that what he did was not believable, it is that it was shitty writing.

I'm not sure you can have it both ways:  if Jon had outsmarted Ramsay, you'd complain that the writers lasy because they just followed the same old boring formula used in every other hero's story.  Since he didn't outsmart him (or, at least, allowed his temper to get the better of him after Ramsay started his charge - which is just what Jon's plan called for), you call the writers lazy because, if Jon's plan doesn't work as expected, it must be because "he was a moron."  The writers can't win either way on that complaint, so i don't think you are being reasonable.

No, my bitch about Jon being stupid is that it is just lame and makes me not like the character - he *deserved* to lose that battle, and it bugs me that they made him into a moron in order to serve their lazy writing that demands that the protagonist be put into some kind of false tension so we can all be nervous about him making it.

My goal here is not to bitch about the writing, so if they had done something else that worked better, I would not bitch about it - I am not looking for a reason to find their writing trite, I am assuming that they are being trite because I can't imagine another reason why they would write it in such a silly fashion.

My response that this could have been done another way was to refute the claim made by viper that the writers HAD to write it this way because in fact Jon is an idiot and there was no way to write this otherwise.

The "Jon is an idiot" argument is your and vipers; it has little to do with the episode.  I have no problems whatsoever with Ramsay being able to push Jon's buttons (as he had been able to push everyone else's buttons) in this episode.  That doesn't make Jon an idiot, any more than it made Roose, or Theon, or anyone else idiots... except in the minds of you and Viper.  Merely repeating "Jon is an idiot" doesn't make him an idiot. 

[grumbler]

He is a commander of other men whose lives are in his hands. Sacrificing all of them in a vain attempt to save his brother is idiotic.

Sansa was right - Rickon was already dead.

He doesn't sacrifice his men in his attempt to save his brother.  They sacrifice themselves in an attempt to save him.

And, yes, Sansa was right, but Jon hasn't been trained to be as cold as Sansa.

[viper37]

Translation: He was a moron, an Ramsay out thought him.

his younger brother was shot just in front of his eyes, after Ramsey Bolton gave him a "chance" (in fact, he was toying with him, he is a pretty good shot).

You are agreeing with me here. My point is that the character of Jon was intended to be a pretty bright guy who was something of a natural leader of soldiers.

Bright does not mean without emotions.  He lost it.

His plan was fine, but plans don't matter if the moment the fight starts you just do exactly what the other guy obviously wants you to do. my beef isn't that what he did was not believable, it is that it was shitty writing.

If he had stayed and waited for Rickon to arrive, or moved back to his lines, you would have bitched it was out of character since he really loved his little brother (and he said so the evening before, disagreeing again with Sansa).

[viper37]

demands that the protagonist be put into some kind of false tension so we can all be nervous about him making it.

I wasn't nervous.  I don't think most watchers were nervous.  It's pretty clear Jon Snow and Daenerys have a big role to play in this story, it is pretty clear since the very beginning of the show and I have written about it at the time.

the claim made by viper that the writers HAD to write it this way because in fact Jon is an idiot and there was no way to write this otherwise.

See Minsky's answer.

[viper37]

The flayed people burning on the crosses, who were they?

[Zanza]

And, yes, Sansa was right, but Jon hasn't been trained to be as cold as Sansa.

Not just cold. She has become a cruel psychopath herself. More like Cersei than her own mother now.

[Admiral Yi]

Not just cold. She has become a cruel psychopath herself. More like Cersei than her own mother now.

Huh?  Are you basing this just on the doggie dinner?

[viper37]

Not just cold. She has become a cruel psychopath herself. More like Cersei than her own mother now.

Huh?  Are you basing this just on the doggie dinner?

She did not want to rescue her brother from Bolton to sacrifice her only chance at revenge.  And she fed her loving, caring husband to the dogs.

[Berkut]

Translation: He was a moron, an Ramsay out thought him.

his younger brother was shot just in front of his eyes, after Ramsey Bolton gave him a "chance" (in fact, he was toying with him, he is a pretty good shot).

You are agreeing with me here. My point is that the character of Jon was intended to be a pretty bright guy who was something of a natural leader of soldiers.

Bright does not mean without emotions.  He lost it.

His plan was fine, but plans don't matter if the moment the fight starts you just do exactly what the other guy obviously wants you to do. my beef isn't that what he did was not believable, it is that it was shitty writing.

If he had stayed and waited for Rickon to arrive, or moved back to his lines, you would have bitched it was out of character since he really loved his little brother (and he said so the evening before, disagreeing again with Sansa).

No, actually I would not. Of course, if that is what the writers were going to have him do, they would have written the scene completley differently anyway.

The only reason they wrote is as they did is they needed some reason for the battle to go terribly wrong so Jon would need to be saved at the last moment.

Had they written it some other way, I am sure you would be telling us THAT way was the only possible way it could be written, and certainly the best possible way.